gainforest/ethereum-forums · Datasets at Hugging Face

61

15,936

Solidity Mathematical Expression Interpreter Library

solidity-mathematical-expression-interpreter-library

40,958

1

9,236

YoungDeveloper78

Parsa

2023-09-28T08:31:06.556Z

2023-09-28T09:33:24.492Z

<p>Title: Solidity Mathematical Expression Interpreter Library</p> <p>Description:</p> <p>Hello Ethereum Magicians community,</p> <p>I’m excited to introduce a Solidity Mathematical Expression Interpreter Library. This library is designed to enable mathematical expression interpretation within the Ethereum ecosystem while providing support for integers.</p> <p>Features:</p> <ul> <li>Mathematical Expression Parsing: Our library can parse and evaluate mathematical expressions that include operators such as +, -, *, /, %, and ^, as well as parentheses for defining the order of operations.</li> <li>Solidity Compatibility: The library is written in Solidity, making it easy to integrate with smart contracts on the Ethereum blockchain.</li> <li>Safe and Secure: While this library provides powerful mathematical capabilities, it’s crucial to exercise caution when processing untrusted input strings.</li> </ul> <p>Use Cases:</p> <ul> <li>Smart Contracts: You can use this library in your Solidity smart contracts to perform complex mathematical calculations within the Ethereum network.</li> <li>DeFi Applications: DeFi projects often require mathematical operations. Our library simplifies these calculations within DeFi protocols.</li> <li>Custom Calculations: If your project involves custom mathematical operations, this library provides a flexible solution.</li> </ul> <p>Please Note:</p> <p>This library is provided “as is,” and I make no guarantees about its correctness or suitability for any specific purpose. It’s important to thoroughly test and validate its functionality before deploying it in a production environment.</p> <p>GitHub Repository: <a href="https://github.com/YoungDeveloper78/Math-Interpreter-Solidity" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">Math Interpreter Solidity GitHub</a></p> <p>I’m eager to hear your thoughts and feedback on this library. Let’s discuss its potential applications and any improvements that can be made.</p> <p>Feel free to ask questions, share your insights, and explore how this library can benefit the Ethereum community.</p> <p>Thank you for your time, and I look forward to our discussions!</p> <p>Best regards, Parsa Rahbaran</p>

null

0

33

541.6

0

false

2

false

null

/t/solidity-mathematical-expression-interpreter-library/15936/1

61

15,936

Solidity Mathematical Expression Interpreter Library

solidity-mathematical-expression-interpreter-library

52,067

2

9,236

YoungDeveloper78

Parsa

2024-10-20T11:47:43.835Z

<p>ParsaRahabarn/Math-interpreter-solidity</p>

null

0

23

9.6

0

false

0

false

null

/t/solidity-mathematical-expression-interpreter-library/15936/2

61

2,949

Community guidelines or rules

community-guidelines-or-rules

9,340

1

1,128

adamschmideg

Adam

2019-03-20T10:21:34.565Z

<p>This is my take on it: <a href="https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/5-strategies-of-contribution" rel="nofollow noopener">5 strategies of contribution · ethereum/wiki</a>. If you know a better category to post it to, please, tell it.</p>

null

0

13

17.6

2

false

0

false

null

/t/community-guidelines-or-rules/2949/1

61

2,949

Community guidelines or rules

community-guidelines-or-rules

9,357

2

1

jpitts

Jeth Pitts

2019-03-20T19:57:28.377Z

<p>A good point to clarify on is that this is intended for written proposals and longer-form commentary, if I am understanding this correctly.</p>

null

0

13

7.6

2

true

0

false

null

/t/community-guidelines-or-rules/2949/2

61

20,112

Requesting feedback on Yellow Paper Shangai update

requesting-feedback-on-yellow-paper-shangai-update

48,721

1

1,267

pldespaigne

2024-05-25T14:36:54.024Z

<p>Hi everyone!</p> <p>I’ve created a <a href="https://github.com/ethereum/yellowpaper/pull/906" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">PR to update the Yellow Paper to Shanghai</a>, unfortunately it has been stuck for more than 3 weeks now, because maintainers currently don’t have the bandwidth to review it.</p> <p>If you have some time and are used to the YP formalism, I would really appreciate that you give me some feedback on the PR.</p> <p>In a more general subject, and because I’m panning to implement Cancun update next, it could be great to also discuss of ways to better maintain that repo.</p> <p>PS: I’m not blaming the maintainers here, they are probably understaffed and have many other things to handle.</p>

null

0

11

117.2

1

false

3

false

null

/t/requesting-feedback-on-yellow-paper-shangai-update/20112/1

61

20,631

Idea and Prototype for an Intent-based Oracle Extending ERC-4337

idea-and-prototype-for-an-intent-based-oracle-extending-erc-4337

49,935

1

11,609

tomw1808

Thomas Wiesner

2024-07-24T09:29:45.662Z

<p>First time poster on Ethereum magicians, I hope I’m not overstepping here, if so, please let me know…</p> <p>I’m looking for some early technical feedback on a new oracle solution my team and I are working on, or interested people who potentially want to give it a try.</p> <p>We were working on a novel oracle solution that leverages ERC-4337 account abstraction to provide real-time on-chain price updates. Unlike traditional pull or push-based oracles, our approach uses an intent system leveraging and extending the already existing infrastructure for erc4337 account abstraction.</p> <p>Something like this:</p> <p><div class="lightbox-wrapper"><a class="lightbox" href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/uploads/default/original/2X/6/655c1798e1a56badfe68a10060e4e3659781d9f1.jpeg" data-download-href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/uploads/default/655c1798e1a56badfe68a10060e4e3659781d9f1" title="SCR-20240724-kgpt"><img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/uploads/default/optimized/2X/6/655c1798e1a56badfe68a10060e4e3659781d9f1_2_690x316.jpeg" alt="SCR-20240724-kgpt" data-base62-sha1="esFwVwtGacmAqwfAH4dJcLOPNND" width="690" height="316" srcset="https://ethereum-magicians.org/uploads/default/optimized/2X/6/655c1798e1a56badfe68a10060e4e3659781d9f1_2_690x316.jpeg, https://ethereum-magicians.org/uploads/default/optimized/2X/6/655c1798e1a56badfe68a10060e4e3659781d9f1_2_1035x474.jpeg 1.5x, https://ethereum-magicians.org/uploads/default/optimized/2X/6/655c1798e1a56badfe68a10060e4e3659781d9f1_2_1380x632.jpeg 2x" data-dominant-color="A4BEC6"><div class="meta"><svg class="fa d-icon d-icon-far-image svg-icon" aria-hidden="true"><use href="#far-image"></use></svg><span class="filename">SCR-20240724-kgpt</span><span class="informations">1920×880 118 KB</span><svg class="fa d-icon d-icon-discourse-expand svg-icon" aria-hidden="true"><use href="#discourse-expand"></use></svg></div></a></div></p> <p>The idea we had was to run a slightly modified erc4337 bundler that listens to a new kind of UserOp, or wraps the actual UserOp in a DataRequestOp and injects updated (price/…/?) information before submitting the actual transaction. From a data-consuming contract perspective, it would be usable very much like a push oracle, just like manually triggering an update before read and would basically ensure accurate and up-to-date data being on chain before a contract reads it. On the other end, the bundler (or whoever is providing data) gets compensated for its services through the same mechanism that erc4337 already uses. So, it would create an additional economic incentive to run a bundler.</p> <p>We got a prototype for a single bundler and the whole process running on sepolia. It’s of course not decentralized and the end vision is a decentralized network of bundlers or something like aggregated signatures of several bundlers and an open protocol to let anyone run a bundler+dataprovider and potentially a reputation dashboard of some sort.</p> <p>Anyways, that’s the idea in a nutshell. Thoughts, concerns? Any projects that work on a tangential system and want to collaborate? Anyone who needs access to real time US Equities, Commodities or Forex and want to give it a try? Anyone who is currently running Bundlers and would be interested in implementing it - or spearhead an ERC together?</p> <p>Thanks,<br> Thomas</p>

null

0

23

424.6

1

false

2

false

null

/t/idea-and-prototype-for-an-intent-based-oracle-extending-erc-4337/20631/1

61

20,631

Idea and Prototype for an Intent-based Oracle Extending ERC-4337

idea-and-prototype-for-an-intent-based-oracle-extending-erc-4337

49,983

2

5,618

0xTraub

null

2024-07-28T23:05:29.174Z

2024-07-28T23:06:00.447Z

<p>Welcome to the forums. Definitely not overstepping. Always nice to see people bringing original ideas up for debate. It’s an interesting idea for sure. There’s definitely a lot of room for improvements to the AA-stack with 4337. I have some questions, several of which may be answered with more implementation details.</p> <ol> <li> <p>What does the workflow for a UserOp express an intent to have a DataRequestOp filled?</p> </li> <li> <p>How does the UserOp ensure that the DataRequestOp is filled within the same bundled ERC-4337 transaction?</p> </li> <li> <p>How can the UserOp ensure that the DataRequestOp is filled by a trusted party or that the data is itself trustworthy?</p> </li> <li> <p>Can a second UserOp “piggy-back” off of the data provided by another UserOp requesting the same data? (I.E two UserOps wanting the same price feed information)?</p> </li> <li> <p>What’s the benefit of adding the complexity of an entirely separate User Op instead of using an existing pull-based oracle and attaching it as data to a user-op (e.g. chainlink data streams)</p> </li> </ol>

null

0

16

3.2

2

false

0

false

null

/t/idea-and-prototype-for-an-intent-based-oracle-extending-erc-4337/20631/2

61

20,631

Idea and Prototype for an Intent-based Oracle Extending ERC-4337

idea-and-prototype-for-an-intent-based-oracle-extending-erc-4337

49,987

3

11,609

tomw1808

Thomas Wiesner

2024-07-29T08:59:25.992Z

<p>Hi <a class="mention" href="/u/0xtraub">@0xTraub</a> ,</p> <p>great questions, let me try and answer them:</p> <p>Regarding 1. 2.) We’re actually wrapping the UserOp into another type of operation, a DataRequestOp. So, the bundler prototype we created [1] is actually an extension to the current bundler. It takes in a DataRequestOp, runs through the wrapped UserOp to ensure the bundler gets paid for the Data provision (and of course also for the normal bundler operation), then injects another UserOp towards the Entrypoint and sends out both within the same transaction. The UserOp itself should error out if the timestamp in the oracle contract - when reading the data - is anything but the block.timestamp. It’s up to the user to allow a certain wiggle room here, but since both UserOps (one for updating the oracle data and another that actually calls then whatever needs to be called from the UserOp) is in the same TX, the block timestamp should be the same, so it would make sense to restrict it to that. So, in short, its up to the user.</p> <p>Regarding 4. and 5.) Before answering that question, I want to take a step back here. The problem with a lot of data, but especially financial data, is licensing and data rights. We’re battling quite a bit for our own data feeds to have display rights for our charts and our users (at Morpher, the company I work for). Standard display right licenses don’t even usually include redistribution rights. Getting something like a UDP or a consolidated SIP feed with display and redistribution rights does not come cheap. And the negotiation and setup to get access to this data isn’t straight forward neither, so the barrier of entry is quite high. Another problem with current Push oracles is the delay, I know before the oracle will update - for a great enough certainty - the price of the update and when the update will be. Pull Oracles usually have a lower delay (however, I did get a measurable delay in seconds, long enough that something like high leverage perp markets with the feeds is unfeasible), but then its usually just the attestation service you pay for, not for the data, so you get the data before you actually paid anything at all, it becomes a hard sell to data vendors. E.g. You can hook into Pyth network today and get the price for any feed, if you want the attestation it will cost you something (AFAIK 1 wei currently, subject to change in a future governance if I am not mistaken). One thing that our architecture solves is that someone in possession of data can be <em>certain</em> that a payment happened before the data is distributed. Looking at large exchanges or large data vendors, it opens up a huge new market opportunity. Looking at 2nd level distributors, its easy to add in another stream of income through providing data if you want. So, that’s kind-of the angle we’re coming from with the solution, mostly a rights/delay fix to get high quality data on-chain, so that something like delay based arbitrage becomes impossible. Piggy backing off another userOp is both possible and impossible, we haven’t decided on an architecture yet. In the current incarnation of the prototype its impossible, because the data is written for a target contract only into the oracle contract, so reading out the data is only possible for the contract that requested the data in the first place. Changing this is trivial, from an architecture point of view. I think its something we decide on once we have data vendors onboard for a trial phase to run a bundler including something I would call somehow authoritative data provider - where users get the data directly from the source ideally.</p> <p>Which brings me to 3) The trust problem. And that is something we’re currently looking into and something we’re actively researching. There are a few ideas floating around. One is, you have different data providers with different lists of data which have a certain reputation for providing data. That is then either something like a (on-chain, decentralized?) reputation dashboard, or registry of some sort, where you say “I want the current price of Nasdaq:AAPL” and it spits out a list of urls for bundlers who have a stake/proven track record/reputation score/price/… Another idea is to make it an on-chain aggregate of signatures, something like a BLS aggregation signature scheme where a data point is requested with at least X off-chain attestations from Y data providers and it only passes the oracle update if all the signatures are valid. Problem here is the delay, which we would like to keep well under 1 second at all times.</p> <p>Lots of text, I still hope I could answer a few things. We’re currently working on a demo that will probably make it all a bit more accessible - always better to have something to play around with…</p> <p>Thomas</p> <p>[1] <a href="https://github.com/Morpher-io/dd-voltaire" class="inline-onebox" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">GitHub - Morpher-io/dd-voltaire: Modular and lighting-fast Python Bundler for Ethereum EIP-4337 Account Abstraction, modded to support oracle data injection</a> and the new endpoint would be this one: <a href="https://github.com/Morpher-io/dd-voltaire/blob/dc57add61bffaa0e9532aa494dbb5952df474e00/voltaire_bundler/rpc/rpc_http_server.py#L141" class="inline-onebox" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">dd-voltaire/voltaire_bundler/rpc/rpc_http_server.py at dc57add61bffaa0e9532aa494dbb5952df474e00 · Morpher-io/dd-voltaire · GitHub</a></p>

null

0

15

68

1

false

2

false

null

/t/idea-and-prototype-for-an-intent-based-oracle-extending-erc-4337/20631/3

61

1,642

Toolkit for planned changes/forks on testnet

toolkit-for-planned-changes-forks-on-testnet

4,954

1

jpitts

Jeth Pitts

2018-10-21T20:05:41.799Z

2018-10-21T20:28:40.290Z

<p>I’ve seen various comments on Twitter and direct, as well as discussion at EF DevOps about having better planning and documentation with testnet deployments. Some that stand out in particular are: 1. creating institutional knowledge and 2. ways we can enlist more help in the process.</p> <p>I’ll start the thread here and collect some of those discussing this.</p> <p>For background, start with this thread: <a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/issues-we-discovered-in-the-ropsten-constantinople-hard-fork/1598">Lane Rettig’s Retrospective & comments</a>.</p> <p>Initial work is on a <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-zWUV491YLK9RxmyFAaY34yvhfEP6umOweXP1EKBhdI/edit#">DevOps Retrospective</a>, in order to discuss what happened and what can be done / put into the toolkit.</p>

null

0

8

206.6

2

true

2

false

null

/t/toolkit-for-planned-changes-forks-on-testnet/1642/1

61

1,642

Toolkit for planned changes/forks on testnet

toolkit-for-planned-changes-forks-on-testnet

4,955

2

69

fubuloubu

null

2018-10-22T04:46:09.820Z

<p>This is great!</p> <p>I think regarding “enlisting more help” for mining (eventually validating) on testnets, there will never be incentive to mine unless we make incentive to mine. One way would be to set aside some money to award mining for a specific length of blocks for the final test period. This is after a period of initial integration testing between client developers.</p> <p>Awards could be given manually to the addresses that mine during the period (if it was considered stable enough to award) at a rate of 0.001 mainnet ETH to 1 testnet ETH. You would ideally get 1/1000 of the total difficulty/stake (if properly advertised), which would correspond with what should be expected for the mainnet release. For PoS, I think staking tokens could be freely given so inadvertent slashing isn’t a concern, we would just award fees and block rewards manually to the stakes addresses to conduct our final, incentivized test.</p> <p>I also think we should give up on advertising the non-incentivized PoW/PoS test network for anyone other than client devs and people testing mining upgrades or whatever. Smart contract testing needs a way more stable environment for conducting tests (like Rinkeby), and that should be the best practice/common wisdom everyone should have.</p>

null

0

8

66.6

2

false

2

false

null

/t/toolkit-for-planned-changes-forks-on-testnet/1642/2

61

16,474

Exploring the Potential of Multiple RPC Node Providers

exploring-the-potential-of-multiple-rpc-node-providers

42,067

1

9,512

Allyn

2023-11-06T20:40:07.725Z

<p>Hello Ethereum Magicians! <img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/wave.png?v=12" title=":wave:" class="emoji" alt=":wave:" loading="lazy" width="20" height="20"></p> <p>I wanted to start a discussion about the advantages and challenges of using multiple RPC node providers for blockchain requests. This approach can significantly enhance the reliability and performance of blockchain applications.</p> <p>Here are a few points to consider:</p> <ul> <li>How can multiple RPC node providers improve the uptime and scalability of your applications?</li> <li>What challenges have you faced when working with multiple RPC providers?</li> <li>Are there any specific use cases where you see the most benefit from this approach?</li> </ul> <p>I’m eager to hear your thoughts and experiences. Let’s dive into this exciting topic together! <img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/blush.png?v=12" title=":blush:" class="emoji" alt=":blush:" loading="lazy" width="20" height="20"></p> <p>Please share your insights and join the conversation!</p>

null

0

13

312.6

0

false

0

false

null

/t/exploring-the-potential-of-multiple-rpc-node-providers/16474/1

61

16,474

Exploring the Potential of Multiple RPC Node Providers

exploring-the-potential-of-multiple-rpc-node-providers

49,202

2

8,913

ake

Ake

2024-06-18T02:26:23.352Z

<p>Just stumbled on this. Mostly on your first point, the biggest problem I had is being able to reliably receive smart contract events as they come in. This one always has issues no matter the RPC provider. And when you need to reliably receive the events, they are most of the time are critical or almost critical to your setup.</p> <p>The best way to go about this seems to be to set up a redundant event listener with multiple RPC node providers, eg with the top ones.</p> <p>Here’s examples with web3.py, web3.js & ethers that we built at our Chainstack developer portal.</p> <ul> <li> <p>Ethereum: How to set up a redundant event listener with Python</p> </li> <li> <p>Ethereum: BUIDLing a redundant event listener with ethers and web3.js</p> </li> </ul>

null

0

9

6.8

0

false

0

false

null

/t/exploring-the-potential-of-multiple-rpc-node-providers/16474/2

61

14,705

Compute Units Estimation

compute-units-estimation

38,333

1

8,392

a10zn8

A10zn8

2023-06-16T09:37:04.832Z

2023-06-16T09:38:07.792Z

<p>Greetings everyone,</p> <p>I’m currently involved in a project, the primary goal of which is to create a system capable of estimating the relative complexity of each JSON-RPC method. We’re building this in the context of our work on <a href="http://drpc.org" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">drpc.org</a>, where we’re creating a community of node runners to run a decentralized rpc provider service.</p> <p>One of the more intriguing challenges we’re grappling with is the construction of a fair model to estimate the cost of calls. To give you an example, the ‘eth_blockNumber’ method is relatively inexpensive, costing about 10 compute units (CUs). The ‘eth_getBalance’ method is slightly more expensive at 11 CUs, while ‘eth_call’ is even more so, with a cost of 21 CUs. The list goes on.</p> <p>So, how do we create a comprehensive model that ensures a fair and accurate estimation of call costs? I am eager to hear your insights and look forward to the exchange of ideas.</p> <h3> <a name="first-iteration-1" class="anchor" href="#first-iteration-1"></a>First iteration</h3> <p>In order to establish a baseline for this research, I adopted the following methodology: I selected two distinct Ethereum nodes, Erigon and Nethermind, and tested almost each JSON-RPC method’s performance under varying rps pressures.</p> <p>So, here’s what I did: I tested the performance of two Ethereum nodes, Erigon and Nethermind, under different rates of requests per second (RPS). I added missing methods to Ethspam (here’s the link: <a href="https://github.com/p2p-org/ethspam" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">https://github.com/p2p-org/ethspam</a>) and used a load test tool I wrote called Ether Bench (link: <a href="https://github.com/p2p-org/ether-bench" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">https://github.com/p2p-org/ether-bench</a>).</p> <p>The tests provided a lot of data. The main objective was to create a robust model capable of providing fair estimations comparable to existing Compute Unit (CU) estimations from various public providers. I mainly looked at three things:</p> <ol> <li>How long do requests take at 100 RPS</li> <li>The maximum RPS where every request is successful</li> <li>The average response size</li> </ol> <p>I turned these numbers into a scale from 0 to 1 and used them in this formula:</p> <p><code>0.5 * latency + 0.3 * (1-throughput) + 0.2 * size</code></p> <p>Based on that formula and multiple measurement results, I came to our current cu estimation, which can be found here - <a href="https://docs.drpc.org/pricing/compute-units" class="inline-onebox" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">DRPC – Compute units</a></p> <h3> <a name="questions-2" class="anchor" href="#questions-2"></a>Questions</h3> <p>Now, I need your help. My formula is a guess, and I think we can make it better.</p> <p>Are there more details we should add? Have you worked on something similar? How would you solve this?</p> <p>I’m excited to hear your ideas.</p>

null

0

14

207.8

1

false

0

false

null

/t/compute-units-estimation/14705/1

61

2,538

Vlad Zamfir's Dilemma: Autonomous Software vs. Crypto Law

vlad-zamfirs-dilemma-autonomous-software-vs-crypto-law

7,750

1

226

Ethernian

2019-01-29T00:24:38.496Z

2019-01-29T22:26:24.445Z

<p>Vlad Zamfir has started a <a href="https://twitter.com/VladZamfir/status/1089041262626390016" rel="nofollow noopener">new discussion about Crypto Law</a> as opposite to “autonomous software” and “wiling to die on that hill”.</p> <p>Despite of that fact that Vlad is well known troll and uses too much ad hominem argumentation (for my taste), the topic he started is important.</p> <p><strong>Vlad’s central message is:</strong><br> <em>"Our shared reality that we need fully autonomous software to escape state control is insecure and aggressive And it 100% isn’t true</em>" and should be replaced by Crypto Law (whatever he means by that). Otherwise crypto will become illegal.</p> <p><strong>I disagree with Vlad, because …</strong></p> <ul> <li> <p><strong>On sovereign Crypto Law</strong></p> <ol> <li>Any off-chain law needs a law enforcement officers.</li> <li>Law enforcement officers will need a sovereign space where they can operate. Otherwise they will enforce third party’s law (the legacy state law).</li> <li>Sovereign territory and sovereign law need to be defended. Declaration of sovereign Crypto Law means Declaration of Independence. This (if taken seriously) will provoke the state powers and lead to war (or some kind of).</li> <li>Neither I see any reason to provoke a war against state’s legal systems (it is just unnecessary - now we can still work perfectly legal), nor I see how Crypto can win it. May be Vlad is “willing to die on this hill” - I am not.</li> <li>Any radicalization of Crypto will make the space evil because majority becomes smaller but radicalized.</li> <li>1-5: Declaration of Sovereign Crypto Law will create more damage. Nevertheless it makes sense to talk about rules we a trying to follow.</li> </ol> </li> <li> <p><strong>On autonomous software execution</strong></p> <ol> <li>I agree with Vlad, that autonomous (and anonymous) software execution can’t shield actors in crypto space fully.</li> <li>Nevertheless it shields us enough to make a political process more feasible than blind law enforcement.</li> <li>If we give up our shields, the will be no need for political process at all.</li> </ol> </li> <li> <p><strong>Synthesis: Autonomous software meets Crypto Law</strong></p> <ol> <li>Modern society is a construct of “checks and balances” of different kinds of power.</li> <li>An institution can only sustain as one of these “checks and balances” if it is strong enough to resist a pressure of other institutions, but at the same time flexible enough to cooperate with them.</li> <li>Crypto should try to become a new institution among existing “checks and balances”.</li> <li>It will be only possible if it <em><strong>keeps both</strong></em> its <em><strong>"automation and anonymity"</strong></em> for sustainability <strong><em>and</em></strong> creates a new “<strong><em>Crypto Law</em></strong>” interface for cooperation with other institutions.</li> <li>It is only the way how it can keep self-sovereign features in long term, like anonymity, self-sovereign money and settlement. Otherwise either Crypto will lose its “crypto” or it will become illegal.</li> </ol> </li> </ul> <p>Any thoughts?</p>

null

0

23

214.6

2

false

1

false

null

/t/vlad-zamfirs-dilemma-autonomous-software-vs-crypto-law/2538/1

61

2,538

Vlad Zamfir's Dilemma: Autonomous Software vs. Crypto Law

vlad-zamfirs-dilemma-autonomous-software-vs-crypto-law

7,799

2

1

jpitts

Jeth Pitts

2019-01-29T20:01:36.840Z

<p>X-Posting this to the Etherians Forum:</p> <p><a href="https://forum.etherean.org/t/vlad-zamfir-s-dilemma-autonomous-software-vs-crypto-law-x-post-from-fem/217" class="onebox" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://forum.etherean.org/t/vlad-zamfir-s-dilemma-autonomous-software-vs-crypto-law-x-post-from-fem/217</a></p>

null

0

14

32.8

2

true

0

false

null

/t/vlad-zamfirs-dilemma-autonomous-software-vs-crypto-law/2538/2

61

25,292

Proposal: Decentralized Recovery Framework for Legacy Wallets Amid Quantum Risks

proposal-decentralized-recovery-framework-for-legacy-wallets-amid-quantum-risks

61,525

1

14,108

TrentwilliamH

Trentwilliam H

2025-08-29T18:27:58.121Z

<p>Hey Magicians,</p> <p>With recent warnings like Vitalik’s estimate of a 20% chance that quantum computers could break ECDSA by 2030, Ethereum faces a growing threat to legacy wallets via “harvest now, decrypt later” attacks from advanced actors (e.g., state programs). This exacerbates the already $3.4B+ in lost ETH from user errors like seed phrase losses, highlighting a systemic issue for early adopters who built the network.</p> <p>All viable responses challenge our ethos of immutability and sovereignty:</p> <ul> <li><strong>Do Nothing</strong>: Risks mass theft of inactive funds, eroding trust and abandoning pioneers (as noted in Deloitte’s quantum risk assessments).</li> <li><strong>Forced Migration</strong>: As implied in the Lean Ethereum vision (replacing BLS/KZG with hash-based alternatives over the next decade), this could secure the protocol but mandate upgrades, potentially leading to funds loss during “recovery forks” (per Vitalik) and fracturing the community like past debates.</li> <li><strong>Decentralized Recovery Process</strong>: A generalized, opt-in EIP for verifiable claims on lost funds (e.g., via smart contracts for tx history/associated accounts evidence, with validator consensus in 6-12 month batches). Builds on ERC-4337 abstraction for social recovery and stagnant concepts like ERC-1080 recoverable tokens, without retroactive state changes—funds transfer on-chain post-verification, preserving immutability.</li> </ul> <p><strong>Why This?</strong> It empowers users scalably (not targeted like EIP-999), mitigates quantum fallout proactively, and aligns with post-Pectra roadmaps for better UX. Risks (abuse, complexity) can be mitigated via zk-proofs, audits, and legacy sunsetting.</p> <p>This isn’t about one user—it’s ecosystem-wide.</p> <p>Thoughts?</p>

null

0

8

6.6

1

false

0

false

null

/t/proposal-decentralized-recovery-framework-for-legacy-wallets-amid-quantum-risks/25292/1

61

5,415

EIP-3279: Transaction fee share by smart contract deployers

eip-3279-transaction-fee-share-by-smart-contract-deployers

16,940

1

2,802

tarekskr

null

2021-02-24T18:19:59.691Z

2021-03-02T13:16:39.031Z

<p>A lot of smart contract developers are not able to capture any value from their widely used smart contracts, and are thus forced to deploy meaningless tokens in order to be able to do so. If developers get a small share of all the fees generated by users interacting with their smart contracts, it will potentially solve the aforementioned problem. In addition, it will provide huge incentives for developers to choose Ethereum over other platforms for their applications.</p> <p>I’ve already submitted EIP-3279 here: <a href="https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/pull/3279/files" class="inline-onebox" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">eip-draft-smartcontract-fee-share: Transaction fee share by smart contract deployers by tarekskr · Pull Request #3279 · ethereum/EIPs · GitHub</a></p> <p>Would really appreciate it if someone is able to help me formalize the technical side of this EIP (specification, security considerations, etc.) <img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/pray.png?v=9" title=":pray:" class="emoji" alt=":pray:"></p>

null

0

13

127.6

0

false

0

false

null

/t/eip-3279-transaction-fee-share-by-smart-contract-deployers/5415/1

61

3,758

Ethereum Magicians 2.0 Updates & Roadmap

ethereum-magicians-2-0-updates-roadmap

12,567

1

1,675

anett

Anett Rolikova

2019-11-06T17:37:50.415Z

2019-11-07T16:45:52.341Z

<p>Hi Magicians <img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/wave.png?v=9" title=":wave:" class="emoji" alt=":wave:"></p> <p>There’s a list of improvements & upgrades that I have been working on with help from <a class="mention" href="/u/jpitts">@jpitts</a> <img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/sparkles.png?v=9" title=":sparkles:" class="emoji" alt=":sparkles:"></p> <p>After Devcon5 that just happened in Osaka <img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/jp.png?v=9" title=":jp:" class="emoji" alt=":jp:">where we hosted very important and successful Ethereum Roadmap 2020 discussions - you can read a recap <a href="https://medium.com/ethereum-magicians/ethereum-magicians-sessions-recap-from-devcon5-aac6f36cb54a">there</a> (Medium article). We would like to do some changes that will help AllCoreDevs and Ethereum Community - FEM (Magicians).</p> <p><img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/sparkles.png?v=9" title=":sparkles:" class="emoji" alt=":sparkles:">We already updated New Member Guide - renamed it into “New Member Guide 2.0” - you can find it in <a href="https://github.com/ethereum-magicians/scrolls/wiki/New-Member-Guide">Scrolls</a> - it’s a guide for new members who will join us (Ethereum Magicians), explaining basic terms that we are using on this forum.</p> <p><img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/sparkles.png?v=9" title=":sparkles:" class="emoji" alt=":sparkles:">We will update <a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/welcome-please-readme-first/8">“Welcome” Please README first!"</a> pinned post to this forum with more updated info.</p> <p><img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/sparkles.png?v=9" title=":sparkles:" class="emoji" alt=":sparkles:">We will work more closely with <a href="http://www.ethereumcatherders.com/">Ethereum Cat Herders</a> and publish more articles regarding to ETH1.x and other important topics that are missing. More to that soon but we will publish an article explaining the roles of Ethereum Magicians and Ethereum Cat Herders very soon.</p> <p><img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/sparkles.png?v=9" title=":sparkles:" class="emoji" alt=":sparkles:">We started to work on creating a new landing page for Ethereum Magicians where we will publish a history of Fellowship of Ethereum Magicians, FAQs, and more.</p> <p><img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/sparkles.png?v=9" title=":sparkles:" class="emoji" alt=":sparkles:">We will start fundraising for Operations, coordination, and event organizing soon and for upgrading EIP process but more to this later.</p> <p><img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/sparkles.png?v=9" title=":sparkles:" class="emoji" alt=":sparkles:">We are planning to have Ethereum Magicians sessions at <a href="https://ethcc.io/">EthCC</a> in Paris but we will start to coordinate that later (December or early January)</p> <p>Just wanted to update you guys <img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/v.png?v=9" title=":v:" class="emoji" alt=":v:"></p>

null

1

0

38

307.6

3

true

false

true

4

false

null

/t/ethereum-magicians-2-0-updates-roadmap/3758/1

61

3,758

Ethereum Magicians 2.0 Updates & Roadmap

ethereum-magicians-2-0-updates-roadmap

12,569

2

80

boris

Boris Mann

2019-11-06T19:58:30.254Z

<p><a class="mention" href="/u/anett">@anett</a> is “we” you and <a class="mention" href="/u/jpitts">@jpitts</a>? This is nit-picky but people shouldn’t be using “we” and EthMagicians. Just say “I” <img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/wink.png?v=9" title=":wink:" class="emoji" alt=":wink:"></p> <p>Also — do you want help? What’s the next step? How do people get involved?</p>

null

1

0

33

21.6

2

false

0

false

null

/t/ethereum-magicians-2-0-updates-roadmap/3758/2

61

3,758

Ethereum Magicians 2.0 Updates & Roadmap

ethereum-magicians-2-0-updates-roadmap

12,571

3

80

boris

Boris Mann

2019-11-06T20:06:01.188Z

<p>Re: ETHCC. I would suggest just integrating directly into ETHCC and curating a track / room.</p> <p>There is the matter of tickets which is the sticking point, but from my experience last year that conference in particular is already greatly transparent and community oriented.</p> <p>But not my show, just some feedback.</p>

null

1

0

30

36

2

false

1

false

null

/t/ethereum-magicians-2-0-updates-roadmap/3758/3

61

3,758

Ethereum Magicians 2.0 Updates & Roadmap

ethereum-magicians-2-0-updates-roadmap

12,576

4

1,675

anett

Anett Rolikova

2019-11-07T14:38:16.351Z

<p>By “we” I mean me with help from <a class="mention" href="/u/jpitts">@jpitts</a> by most of the work & updates are by me.</p> <p>I wanted to share that we are working on improving Ethereum Magicians, and roadmap of what we (mostly I) will work on through next weeks. I think that we (or I) don’t need help (yet). I will definitely post & ask for help when it’s needed. Next steps is just working on stuff <img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/slight_smile.png?v=9" title=":slight_smile:" class="emoji" alt=":slight_smile:"></p>

2

0

26

10.2

3

true

false

true

0

false

null

/t/ethereum-magicians-2-0-updates-roadmap/3758/4

61

3,758

Ethereum Magicians 2.0 Updates & Roadmap

ethereum-magicians-2-0-updates-roadmap

12,577

5

1,675

anett

Anett Rolikova

2019-11-07T14:47:43.394Z

<p>Regarding to EthCC - so far we (Magicians) will have a room for approx 150 people for first day of the conference (from around 9:30am till 5 or 6pm) and we (me and Jamie) were thinking of having something similar to the sessions that we had during Devcon5. But I will create a dedicated post on a forum later as we still have so much time for coordinating that and figuring out the agenda & other stuff around it.<br> No we have other things to work on, EthCC is not a priority now.</p> <p>I shared this post to a forum just to inform the community that we are working on improving the forum <img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/slight_smile.png?v=9" title=":slight_smile:" class="emoji" alt=":slight_smile:"></p>

3

0

26

10.2

3

true

false

true

0

false

null

/t/ethereum-magicians-2-0-updates-roadmap/3758/5

61

3,758

Ethereum Magicians 2.0 Updates & Roadmap

ethereum-magicians-2-0-updates-roadmap

12,581

6

8

wschwab

2019-11-07T15:57:39.656Z

<aside class="quote no-group" data-username="anett" data-post="1" data-topic="3758"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img loading="lazy" alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/anett/48/3020_2.png" class="avatar"> anett:</div> <blockquote> <p><img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/sparkles.png?v=12" title=":sparkles:" class="emoji" alt=":sparkles:" loading="lazy" width="20" height="20">We already updated New Member Guide - renamed it into “New Member Guide 2.0” - you can find it in <a href="https://github.com/ethereum-magicians/scrolls/wiki/New-Member-Guide-2.0">Scrolls</a> - it’s a guide for new members who will join us (Ethereum Magicians), explaining basic terms that we are using on this forum.</p> </blockquote> </aside> <p>I’m not seeing it the New Member Guide there - could it be somewhere else?</p>

null

1

24

14.8

3

false

0

false

null

/t/ethereum-magicians-2-0-updates-roadmap/3758/6

61

3,758

Ethereum Magicians 2.0 Updates & Roadmap

ethereum-magicians-2-0-updates-roadmap

12,583

7

1

jpitts

Jeth Pitts

2019-11-07T16:47:40.178Z

2019-11-07T16:48:48.698Z

<p><a class="mention" href="/u/wschwab">@wschwab</a> and <a class="mention" href="/u/anett">@anett</a> I just fixed the link to the <a href="https://github.com/ethereum-magicians/scrolls/wiki/New-Member-Guide">New Member Guide</a> in Anett’s post above!</p> <p>(all the blame eventually goes to GitHub Wiki’s bug/feature in which the URL quietly changes when the title changes).</p>

6

1

0

23

74.6

2

true

2

false

null

/t/ethereum-magicians-2-0-updates-roadmap/3758/7

61

3,758

Ethereum Magicians 2.0 Updates & Roadmap

ethereum-magicians-2-0-updates-roadmap

12,584

8

80

boris

Boris Mann

2019-11-07T17:00:38.123Z

<p>Any reason not to move Wiki content here?</p> <p>We’ve never gotten adoption of GitHub Issues so maybe just do it all here?</p> <p>I’m happy to help copy / paste. Maybe into a new Resources category.</p>

7

1

0

23

14.6

2

false

0

false

null

/t/ethereum-magicians-2-0-updates-roadmap/3758/8

61

3,758

Ethereum Magicians 2.0 Updates & Roadmap

ethereum-magicians-2-0-updates-roadmap

12,585

9

1,675

anett

Anett Rolikova

2019-11-07T18:06:13.449Z

<p>The reason why it’s on GitHub now is because we wanted to publish it somewhere before posting it on a landing page <img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/slight_smile.png?v=9" title=":slight_smile:" class="emoji" alt=":slight_smile:"></p>

8

0

22

9.4

3

true

false

true

0

false

null

/t/ethereum-magicians-2-0-updates-roadmap/3758/9

61

13,248

E-star name for Consensus Layer upgrade after Deneb

e-star-name-for-consensus-layer-upgrade-after-deneb

34,958

1

303

abcoathup

Andrew B Coathup

2023-03-10T08:00:14.946Z

2025-04-03T21:49:02.462Z

<p><em><strong>Update July 14, 2023</strong></em>: <em>Next CL upgrade named <strong>Electra</strong> on <a href="https://github.com/ethereum/pm/issues/823#issuecomment-1635053770">ACDC call 113</a></em></p> <hr> <p>An E-star name is likely needed for the Consensus Layer upgrade after Deneb,<br> (e.g. Electra) upgrade could <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5SmmkriuwA&t=2970s">possibly be for the Verge</a> + other features.</p> <p>The consensus layer uses <a href="https://github.com/ethereum/eth2.0-pm/issues/215">star names</a> for upgrades whilst the execution layer uses <a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/more-frequent-smaller-hardforks-vs-less-frequent-larger-ones/2929/33">Devcon cities</a>.<br> See: <a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/rfc-post-merge-network-upgrade-naming-schemes/11977">Post-Merge Network Upgrade Naming Schemes</a></p> <p>Upcoming upgrade names:</p> <ul> <li><img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/owl.png?v=12" title=":owl:" class="emoji" alt=":owl:" loading="lazy" width="20" height="20"> Shapella (Shanghai + Capella)</li> <li><img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/blowfish.png?v=12" title=":blowfish:" class="emoji" alt=":blowfish:" loading="lazy" width="20" height="20"> Dencun (Cancun + Deneb)</li> </ul> <p>Making the next upgrade after that likely to be Prague + E star name.</p> <p><a class="mention" href="/u/protolambda">@protolambda</a> has already <a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/rfc-post-merge-network-upgrade-naming-schemes/11977/9">suggested</a> <strong>Practra (Prague + Electra)</strong></p> <blockquote> <p>Electra would then be a great follow-up star name: Electra is a star in the Taurus constellation (bull after bear <img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/wink.png?v=12" title=":wink:" class="emoji" alt=":wink:" loading="lazy" width="20" height="20"> )</p> </blockquote> <p><em>(Apologies if I am stepping on the process for selecting star upgrade names as <a href="https://twitter.com/josephdelong/status/1235979765879844864">I’m not a core dev</a>)</em></p> <hr> <h3><a name="p-34958-e-star-names-1" class="anchor" href="#p-34958-e-star-names-1"></a>E Star names</h3> <p>From: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_proper_names_of_stars" class="inline-onebox">List of proper names of stars - Wikipedia</a></p> <ul> <li>Ebla</li> <li><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edasich">Edasich</a></li> <li><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electra_(star)">Electra</a></li> <li><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elgafar">Elgafar</a></li> <li><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elkurud">Elkurud</a></li> <li><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elnath">Elnath</a></li> <li><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eltanin">Eltanin</a></li> <li>Emiw</li> <li><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enif">Enif</a></li> <li><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Errai_(star)">Errai</a></li> </ul> <hr> <h3><a name="p-34958-poll-2" class="anchor" href="#p-34958-poll-2"></a>Poll</h3> <p>Poll is for signaling purposes only.</p> <div class="poll" data-poll-charttype="bar" data-poll-close="2023-04-29T14:00:00.000Z" data-poll-name="poll" data-poll-public="true" data-poll-results="always" data-poll-status="open" data-poll-type="regular"> <div class="poll-container"> <div class="poll-title">Preferred star name</div> <ul> <li data-poll-option-id="60b997a4c197ba0e9afee626c771367f">Ebla</li> <li data-poll-option-id="140e026bc4d6b7c4eeba7401a78659a9">Edasich</li> <li data-poll-option-id="e0dc7c3212aeef9544823d90f19a9e03">Electra</li> <li data-poll-option-id="6856759f26699dab6c923a311eaaebae">Elgafar</li> <li data-poll-option-id="148c089c01ccd107b920c60641ab3d7e">Elkurud</li> <li data-poll-option-id="8767d2bf302193808d1423d435a0f825">Elnath</li> <li data-poll-option-id="0679ebbc7fce2789eaba752eba015d2f">Eltanin</li> <li data-poll-option-id="440cf81551f1f81204f89526f6d06bab">Emiw</li> <li data-poll-option-id="daac7670c3f680160bbb76b0f1ea1adb">Enif</li> <li data-poll-option-id="6a6e7559d777bf17174f29674170fb0f">Errai</li> </ul> </div> <div class="poll-info"> <div class="poll-info_counts"> <div class="poll-info_counts-count"> <span class="info-number">0</span> <span class="info-label">voters</span> </div> </div> </div> </div>

null

0

53

4,780.6

3

true

false

true

0

false

null

/t/e-star-name-for-consensus-layer-upgrade-after-deneb/13248/1

61

13,248

E-star name for Consensus Layer upgrade after Deneb

e-star-name-for-consensus-layer-upgrade-after-deneb

34,960

2

1,114

gballet

Guillaume Ballet

2023-03-10T08:46:36.373Z

<p>Pari suggested that the name for Eletra + Prague should be “Petra”, which sounds much nicer and pronounceable than Practra.</p>

null

0

39

82.8

2

false

4

false

null

/t/e-star-name-for-consensus-layer-upgrade-after-deneb/13248/2

61

13,248

E-star name for Consensus Layer upgrade after Deneb

e-star-name-for-consensus-layer-upgrade-after-deneb

34,992

3

303

abcoathup

Andrew B Coathup

2023-03-10T23:41:33.441Z

<p><strong>Enif + Prague</strong> could be <strong>Pranif</strong></p>

null

0

32

21.4

3

true

false

true

0

false

null

/t/e-star-name-for-consensus-layer-upgrade-after-deneb/13248/3

61

13,248

E-star name for Consensus Layer upgrade after Deneb

e-star-name-for-consensus-layer-upgrade-after-deneb

35,492

4

1,927

hwwang

Hsiao-Wei Wang

2023-03-23T14:38:02.485Z

2023-03-23T14:39:02.745Z

<p>Although Electra sounds good in pronunciation, I voted for Enif because <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electra_complex" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">Electra complex</a> was on page 1 when I googled Electra. <img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/sweat_smile.png?v=12" title=":sweat_smile:" class="emoji" alt=":sweat_smile:" loading="lazy" width="20" height="20"> It’s not the meme I’d want to play…</p> <p>On the other hand, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epsilon_Pegasi" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">Enif</a>: the brightest star in the northern constellation of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegasus_(constellation)" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">Pegasus</a>. <img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/racehorse.png?v=12" title=":racehorse:" class="emoji" alt=":racehorse:" loading="lazy" width="20" height="20">꒰ঌ ໒꒱</p>

null

0

26

25.2

1

false

1

false

null

/t/e-star-name-for-consensus-layer-upgrade-after-deneb/13248/4

61

13,248

E-star name for Consensus Layer upgrade after Deneb

e-star-name-for-consensus-layer-upgrade-after-deneb

35,556

5

303

abcoathup

Andrew B Coathup

2023-03-24T22:09:23.795Z

<p><a class="mention" href="/u/timbeiko">@timbeiko</a>’s poll showed (some) community support for merged names (CL star + EL city)<br> <a href="https://twitter.com/TimBeiko/status/1638971921168756736" class="onebox" target="_blank" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">https://twitter.com/TimBeiko/status/1638971921168756736</a></p>

null

0

22

4.4

3

true

false

true

0

false

null

/t/e-star-name-for-consensus-layer-upgrade-after-deneb/13248/5

61

13,248

E-star name for Consensus Layer upgrade after Deneb

e-star-name-for-consensus-layer-upgrade-after-deneb

38,855

6

303

abcoathup

Andrew B Coathup

2023-07-04T21:04:02.081Z

<p><a class="mention" href="/u/evanvannesseth">@EvanVanNessEth</a> suggests Errai</p> <aside class="quote" data-post="1" data-topic="14930"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img loading="lazy" alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/evanvannesseth/48/5176_2.png" class="avatar"> <a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/tackling-the-hard-problems-in-ethereum-what-to-name-the-cl-fork-after-deneb/14930">Tackling the hard problems in Ethereum: what to name the CL fork after Deneb</a> <a class="badge-category__wrapper " href="/c/primordial-soup/9"><span data-category-id="9" style="--category-badge-color: #AB9364; --category-badge-text-color: #FFFFFF;" data-drop-close="true" class="badge-category " title="For discussions of potential standards or potential technical solutions, or topics which do not have a category"><span class="badge-category__name">Primordial Soup</span></span></a> </div> <blockquote> I propose that the CL fork after Deneb be named Errai Two reasons: Errai is the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_Cephei" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">future north pole star of the Earth</a>, and will remain so for the next couple thousand years when it becomes so. Perfect for Ethereum. Prague will be the EL fork, and i like the combos of Errai and Prague better than I liked the combos of other E named stars. Errague or (my preferred) Prarrai both sound decent, imho. </blockquote> </aside>

null

0

16

13.2

3

true

false

true

0

false

null

/t/e-star-name-for-consensus-layer-upgrade-after-deneb/13248/6

61

13,248

E-star name for Consensus Layer upgrade after Deneb

e-star-name-for-consensus-layer-upgrade-after-deneb

39,060

7

303

abcoathup

Andrew B Coathup

2023-07-14T00:05:18.975Z

<p>Next CL upgrade named <strong>Electra</strong> on <a href="https://github.com/ethereum/pm/issues/823#issuecomment-1635053770" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">ACDC call 113</a></p>

null

0

12

2.4

3

true

false

true

0

false

null

/t/e-star-name-for-consensus-layer-upgrade-after-deneb/13248/7

61

24,869

Merkle Root of All Blockhashes

merkle-root-of-all-blockhashes

60,520

1

12,758

adraffy

raffy.eth

2025-07-21T05:49:27.645Z

<p>Would it be possible to maintain a merkle root in a system contract like <a href="https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-2935" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">EIP-2935</a> or <a href="https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-4788" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">EIP-4788</a> that represents all blockhashes so we can verify deep historical data?</p> <p>It could be some kind of 2-stage tree where the first level is a tree of block ranges <code>[0, N), [N, 2N), ..</code> and then each range is just a binary merkle of blockhashes so updaters only need to know the last <code>N</code> blocks and <code>height / N</code> range roots. Probably there’s a more efficient structure.</p> <p>Maybe something like this already exists and I don’t know about it.</p>

null

0

19

98.8

1

false

0

false

null

/t/merkle-root-of-all-blockhashes/24869/1

61

47

Suggestion to have a community feedback period for each EIP

suggestion-to-have-a-community-feedback-period-for-each-eip

56

1

jpitts

Jeth Pitts

2018-03-01T17:55:53.070Z

2018-03-01T18:00:22.571Z

<p>In the topic <a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/reviewing-the-process-leading-to-a-hard-fork/45/2">Reviewing the process leading to a hard fork</a>, <a class="mention" href="/u/mks0017">@mks0017</a> suggested that there should be a community feedback period. Each EIP which be allocated a time period for gathering input, voicing concerns, and having Q&As. This time period would be publicized to the community.</p> <p>The full text written by <a class="mention" href="/u/mks0017">@mks0017</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p>While I agree changes need to be made to the process and that there needs to be more clarity in how EIPs are implemented, giving the community veto powers would make governance much more difficult. Getting the community involved in governance should focus primarily on gathering input so that developers can understand the potential non-technical (moral/ethical/legal) outcomes of implementing an EIP.</p> <p>I would suggest updating EIP-1 to include a period when community input is gathered before deciding on whether or not to go forward with an EIP. After it’s clear that the EIP could be successfully implemented from a technical standpoint, a period would be opened where interested participants could comment on their support for or against a proposal. This could be as simple as a weekly or monthly stickied post on the ethereum subreddit that includes current EIPs with short summaries that is open for all to comment. This would vastly increase the community’s voice in the process and would allow participants to voice their concerns. This would also allow developers to pose questions to to ensure all issues are addressed before deciding whether or not to implement an EIP.</p> </blockquote>

null

0

31

83.2

2

true

1

false

null

/t/suggestion-to-have-a-community-feedback-period-for-each-eip/47/1

61

47

Suggestion to have a community feedback period for each EIP

suggestion-to-have-a-community-feedback-period-for-each-eip

64

2

19

Arachnid

Nick Johnson

2018-03-02T19:01:45.796Z

<p>Personally, I think this is a terrible idea. Standards should be written by technical consensus, not majority vote - and they should be accepted as standards if they meet the editorial criteria, regardless of how wise anyone thinks they are.</p> <p>If the standard is for a change to the chain rules, then there certainly needs to be community approval of that - but that should occur outside the EIP process. Attempting to insert some kind of community veto of standards will just lead to people standardising contentious things elsewhere, bypassing the system entirely.</p>

null

1

0

31

91.2

2

false

5

false

null

/t/suggestion-to-have-a-community-feedback-period-for-each-eip/47/2

61

47

Suggestion to have a community feedback period for each EIP

suggestion-to-have-a-community-feedback-period-for-each-eip

71

3

10

mks0017

Mike

2018-03-02T20:32:09.312Z

<p><a class="mention" href="/u/arachnid">@Arachnid</a> it sounds like what you’re saying is in line with what I proposed, so I’m not sure if you’re responding to my comment or sfultong’s original proposal.</p> <p>I agree that a majority vote is not the correct way to reach consensus, and giving the community veto powers would make the process much more difficult. My idea was to standardize a way for the community to voice non-technical concerns to developers. If the EIP meets the editorial criteria and is technically sound, then the community should be given an opportunity to raise issue with a given EIP. There may be moral/ethical/legal issues that the community voices that developers are not aware of, so this process would help bring those issues to light. However the ultimate decision whether or not to implement the EIP would be the same process as it is currently. My proposal just adds an additional layer to allow for more input from the community.</p>

2

0

32

66.4

1

false

1

false

null

/t/suggestion-to-have-a-community-feedback-period-for-each-eip/47/3

61

47

Suggestion to have a community feedback period for each EIP

suggestion-to-have-a-community-feedback-period-for-each-eip

73

4

19

Arachnid

Nick Johnson

2018-03-02T21:23:17.293Z

<p>Yes, I’m sorry, you’re right - I misread your proposal and thought you were talking about approving EIPs as standards, not about deciding whether to implement them or not.</p>

null

1

0

32

31.4

2

false

1

false

null

/t/suggestion-to-have-a-community-feedback-period-for-each-eip/47/4

61

47

Suggestion to have a community feedback period for each EIP

suggestion-to-have-a-community-feedback-period-for-each-eip

75

5

28

CryptoHokie

null

2018-03-02T21:44:15.189Z

<p><a class="mention" href="/u/mks0017">@mks0017</a> did a way better job of summarizing what I, too was originally speaking to. Some forum for the community to voice concerns / raise additional points or counterpoints for an EIP (legal, economic, moral, other external risk). Then I think out of this forum, an informed decision as to whether to proceed with the implementation is made according to the current process.</p> <p>The only thing I’d add is clarifying where and how this forum occurs in conjunction with the EIP process.</p>

4

0

30

11

2

false

0

false

null

/t/suggestion-to-have-a-community-feedback-period-for-each-eip/47/5

61

47

Suggestion to have a community feedback period for each EIP

suggestion-to-have-a-community-feedback-period-for-each-eip

121

6

34

fulldecent

William Entriken

2018-03-12T15:57:52.066Z

<p>I support a required public discussion period. At present, the the median EIP proposal is a shit show of abandoned ideas, poor implementations and poorly thought out concepts (myself included!) It would take a motivated person to watch <em>every</em> new issue and PR to find the gems that certainly do exist.</p> <p>A public discussion period is a quality filter that allows people to discuss something before it is accepted as draft.</p> <p>There is precedent for this type of governance in the Swift project, see <a href="https://apple.github.io/swift-evolution/" rel="nofollow noopener">https://apple.github.io/swift-evolution/</a></p>

null

0

25

10

2

false

0

false

null

/t/suggestion-to-have-a-community-feedback-period-for-each-eip/47/6

61

47

Suggestion to have a community feedback period for each EIP

suggestion-to-have-a-community-feedback-period-for-each-eip

155

7

33

gcolvin

Greg Colvin

2018-03-27T17:03:23.051Z

<p>There isn’t any body to “require” a discussion period, but I’d support establishing a forum for coming to consensus on whether proposals should go forward. This forum would need to be outside of the Fellowship, but would typically take up draft proposals that are Ready for further consideration. As ever, such a forum would only be input to other players in the community, but if th consensus is clear and fair the input should be difficult to ignore.</p>

null

0

22

9.4

2

false

0

false

null

/t/suggestion-to-have-a-community-feedback-period-for-each-eip/47/7

61

1,170

Building a taxonomy of smart contract errors

building-a-taxonomy-of-smart-contract-errors

3,479

1

19

Arachnid

Nick Johnson

2018-08-28T16:24:11.786Z

2018-08-30T23:30:53.234Z

<p>Our goal: To develop a comprehensive error taxonomy for Ethereum smart contracts. A taxonomy helps categorise types of error, and ensure that different applications report the same kind of error the same way.</p> <p>Using error codes in place of descriptive messages has several other advantages:</p> <ul> <li>Reduces the gas cost of deploying contracts.</li> <li>Permits internationalization of error messages.</li> <li>Permits automated handling of expected error types</li> </ul> <p>The need for a proper error taxonomy was recognized during several audits as well as working on the development of ENS smart contracts.</p> <p>We propose to break errors up into a two-level taxonomy of error types. At the top level are major types: Basic reasons that something may fail, such as invalid input or invalid state. Under each major type are minor types: specific cases of the major type.</p> <p>Major type and minor type numbers each range from 1 to 255, enabling each to be packed in a single byte, if necessary.</p> <p>The minor type is then optionally followed by an application-specific error code, in the range 0-65536.</p> <p>In text form, a fully qualified error is represented in the form “E.x.y.z”, where x is the major type, y is the minor type, and z is the app-specific error code.</p> <p>We’d value your input - please propose changes and additions to the taxonomy, and we’ll adjust it to suit.</p> <h1>Taxonomy</h1> <p>This is a work in progress - please help us expand and curate this list.</p> <h2>1: Invalid Input</h2> <p>Errors that occur purely due to the format or contents of the input data belong here.</p> <h3>1.1: Value too small</h3> <p>Examples:</p> <ul> <li>Trying to set a price below a limit.</li> <li>Supplying a timestamp that is before the current time.</li> </ul> <h3>1.2: Value too large</h3> <p>Examples:</p> <ul> <li>Trying to set a value above a limit.</li> <li>Supplying a timestamp that is more than a year in the future.</li> </ul> <h3>1.3: Value mismatch</h3> <p>Examples:</p> <ul> <li>Supplying a different number of elements in two matched array inputs.</li> <li>Mixing element types in a homogenous array.</li> </ul> <h3>1.4: Invalid syntax</h3> <p>Examples:</p> <ul> <li>Including invalid characters in a string</li> </ul> <h3>1.5: Feature not supported</h3> <p>Examples:</p> <ul> <li>Specifying an enum value that is not implemented.</li> </ul> <h3>1.255: Other</h3> <h2>2: Invalid State</h2> <p>Errors that occur due to the current state of the contract, or due to a combination of input and state.</p> <h3>2.1: Input caused overflow/underflow</h3> <p>Examples:</p> <ul> <li>Trying to issue or transfer more tokens than can be represented.</li> </ul> <h3>2.2: Data not found</h3> <p>Examples:</p> <ul> <li>Attempting to reference a mapping entry that is unset.</li> </ul> <h3>2.3: Value too small</h3> <p>Examples:</p> <ul> <li>Attempting to transfer more tokens than are in an account.</li> <li>Attempting to call <code>transferFrom</code> from an account that has insufficient (or no) allowance.</li> </ul> <h3>2.4: Value too large</h3> <p>Examples:</p> <ul> <li>Attempting a transfer that would exceed an account’s limit</li> </ul> <h3>2.5: Value must be nonzero</h3> <p>Examples:</p> <ul> <li>Attempting to specify an address of 0.</li> <li>Attempting to set a limit to 0.</li> </ul> <h3>2.6 Value must be zero</h3> <p>Examples:</p> <ul> <li>Attempting to set a token allowance from one nonzero value to another.</li> </ul> <h3>2.7: No code at address</h3> <p>Examples:</p> <ul> <li>Supplying an external account when a contract is expected.</li> <li>Supplying a nonexistent account address.</li> </ul> <h3>2.8: Interface not implemented</h3> <p>Examples:</p> <ul> <li>Supplying the address of a contract that does not implement a required interface.</li> </ul> <h3>2.9: Feature Disabled</h3> <p>Examples:</p> <ul> <li>Trying to vote after a voting period has ended.</li> </ul> <h3>2.10: Action Already Completed</h3> <p>Examples:</p> <ul> <li>Trying to reveal a bid that has already been revealed.</li> </ul> <h3>2.255: Other</h3> <h2>3: Unauthorised</h2> <h3>3.1: Unauthorised caller</h3> <p>Examples:</p> <ul> <li>Calling an ‘owner only’ contract with an account other than the owner.</li> </ul> <h3>3.2: Unauthorised signer</h3> <p>Examples:</p> <ul> <li>Submitting a signed message with an unrecognised signer.</li> </ul> <h3>3.3: Insufficient authorisations</h3> <p>Examples:</p> <ul> <li>Submitting a request to a multisig with too few signatures.</li> </ul> <h3>3.255: Other</h3> <h2>4: Internal Error</h2> <h3>4.1: Internal Error</h3>

null

1

0

41

703.2

2

false

7

false

null

/t/building-a-taxonomy-of-smart-contract-errors/1170/1

61

1,170

Building a taxonomy of smart contract errors

building-a-taxonomy-of-smart-contract-errors

3,503

2

697

cwhinfrey

Chris Whinfrey

2018-08-28T17:06:32.474Z

2018-08-28T18:15:03.160Z

<p>Couple ideas:</p> <ol> <li>Feature disabled - An error code under “Invalid State” for when a function is not available or is guaranteed to fail with the current state or “phase” of the contract (e.g. calling <code>bid()</code> before bidding is opened, calling <code>vote()</code> after the voting period has ended.)</li> <li>Action has already been completed - An error code under “Invalid State” for when an action that should only be performed once is attempted again. (e.g. <code>revealVote()</code> is called for a vote that has already been revealed)<br> Are these too specific?</li> </ol>

null

1

0

32

31.4

1

false

0

false

null

/t/building-a-taxonomy-of-smart-contract-errors/1170/2

61

1,170

Building a taxonomy of smart contract errors

building-a-taxonomy-of-smart-contract-errors

3,507

3

256

izqui

Jorge Izquierdo

2018-08-28T18:54:22.905Z

<p>I really like this. We have been hesitant to introduce revert reasons because of how expensive having error strings in the contract code is.</p> <p>I wonder if the address of the contract where the error originates should be included in the returned error data as well, so the error would be “E.x.y.z.addr”. In the case of Solidity, if a contract makes a call that reverts, the parent context will revert with the same data. This would make it hard to identify in which contract the error originated, so the application-specific error would be hard to properly detect.</p>

null

1

0

29

30.8

1

false

1

false

null

/t/building-a-taxonomy-of-smart-contract-errors/1170/3

61

1,170

Building a taxonomy of smart contract errors

building-a-taxonomy-of-smart-contract-errors

3,517

4

19

Arachnid

Nick Johnson

2018-08-29T08:59:33.625Z

<aside class="quote no-group" data-username="cwhinfrey" data-post="2" data-topic="1170"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img loading="lazy" alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/cwhinfrey/48/8002_2.png" class="avatar"> cwhinfrey:</div> <blockquote> <ul> <li>Feature disabled - An error code under “Invalid State” for when a function is not available or is guaranteed to fail with the current state or “phase” of the contract (e.g. calling <code>bid()</code> before bidding is opened, calling <code>vote()</code> after the voting period has ended.)</li> <li>Action has already been completed - An error code under “Invalid State” for when an action that should only be performed once is attempted again. (e.g. <code>revealVote()</code> is called for a vote that has already been revealed)</li> </ul> </blockquote> </aside> <p>Good ideas, I’ll add these.</p> <aside class="quote no-group" data-username="izqui" data-post="3" data-topic="1170"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img loading="lazy" alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/izqui/48/224_2.png" class="avatar"> izqui:</div> <blockquote> <p>I wonder if the address of the contract where the error originates should be included in the returned error data as well, so the error would be “E.x.y.z.addr”. In the case of Solidity, if a contract makes a call that reverts, the parent context will revert with the same data. This would make it hard to identify in which contract the error originated, so the application-specific error would be hard to properly detect.</p> </blockquote> </aside> <p>In theory this ought to be discernable using transaction traces, although it’s difficult to do so in practice. Adding it to the revert reason would be very high overhead, however - you’d need code for string concatenation and hex encoding in each contract!</p> <p>I really, really wish Solidity had added revert ABIs, instead of hardcoding a string-based ‘reason’.</p>

2

1

2

28

15.6

2

false

0

false

null

/t/building-a-taxonomy-of-smart-contract-errors/1170/4

61

1,170

Building a taxonomy of smart contract errors

building-a-taxonomy-of-smart-contract-errors

3,519

5

256

izqui

Jorge Izquierdo

2018-08-29T10:11:52.988Z

2018-08-29T10:13:02.508Z

<aside class="quote no-group" data-username="Arachnid" data-post="4" data-topic="1170"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img loading="lazy" alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/arachnid/48/18_2.png" class="avatar"> Arachnid:</div> <blockquote> <p>I really, really wish Solidity had added revert ABIs, instead of hardcoding a string-based ‘reason’.</p> </blockquote> </aside> <p>Would it be problematic to just cast an ABI encoded payload for the error as a string so no hardcoded strings need to be added to contracts at all? You can then have an error parser client side that can read those and return a proper string.</p> <aside class="onebox githubgist" data-onebox-src="https://gist.github.com/izqui/2ffece981bfa1fec74e07164a81e21b2"> <header class="source"> <a href="https://gist.github.com/izqui/2ffece981bfa1fec74e07164a81e21b2" target="_blank" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">gist.github.com</a> </header> <article class="onebox-body"> <h4><a href="https://gist.github.com/izqui/2ffece981bfa1fec74e07164a81e21b2" target="_blank" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">https://gist.github.com/izqui/2ffece981bfa1fec74e07164a81e21b2</a></h4> <h5>error.sol</h5> <pre><code class="Solidity">contract Error { function x() { revert(error(1, 1, 2567)); } function error(uint8 x, uint8 y, uint16 z) internal view returns (string) { return string(abi.encodePacked(x, y, z, address(this))); } }</code></pre> <p> </p> </article> <div class="onebox-metadata"> </div> <div style="clear: both"></div> </aside>

4

1

26

15.2

1

false

0

false

null

/t/building-a-taxonomy-of-smart-contract-errors/1170/5

61

1,170

Building a taxonomy of smart contract errors

building-a-taxonomy-of-smart-contract-errors

3,520

6

225

beltran

null

2018-08-29T10:28:46.177Z

2018-08-29T10:32:42.464Z

<p>fantastic.<br> are those errors to be thrown by the Smart contract (burden on the solidity developer) at runtime or the EVM (or maybe even the compiler in some cases, even though I understand these are mainly runtime errors) ?<br> maybe separating by these categories further clarifies who has to do what with these errors?</p> <aside class="quote no-group" data-username="Arachnid" data-post="1" data-topic="1170"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img loading="lazy" alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/arachnid/48/18_2.png" class="avatar"> Arachnid:</div> <blockquote> <p>Supplying a timestamp that is more than a year in the future.</p> </blockquote> </aside> <p>on the topic of out of bounds for example I would leave it to the Solidity developer to signal that a timestamp is too far into the future, rather than hardcoding this limit somewhere.<br> I can see a use for long term inputs…like bets that happen in the next 5 years</p>

null

1

25

15

2

false

0

false

null

/t/building-a-taxonomy-of-smart-contract-errors/1170/6

61

1,170

Building a taxonomy of smart contract errors

building-a-taxonomy-of-smart-contract-errors

3,521

7

19

Arachnid

Nick Johnson

2018-08-29T11:16:18.687Z

<aside class="quote no-group" data-username="izqui" data-post="5" data-topic="1170"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img loading="lazy" alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/izqui/48/224_2.png" class="avatar"> izqui:</div> <blockquote> <p>Would it be problematic to just cast an ABI encoded payload for the error as a string so no hardcoded strings need to be added to contracts at all? You can then have an error parser client side that can read those and return a proper string.</p> </blockquote> </aside> <p>Not problematic, but a bit weird - Solidity itself is ABI encoding an error string and 4 byte identifier, and we’d be nesting another ABI encoding inside that. It’d be better to be able to return custom ABIs from solidity instead.</p> <aside class="quote no-group" data-username="beltran" data-post="6" data-topic="1170"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img loading="lazy" alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/beltran/48/192_2.png" class="avatar"> beltran:</div> <blockquote> <p>are those errors to be thrown by the Smart contract (burden on the solidity developer) at runtime or the EVM (or maybe even the compiler in some cases, even though I understand these are mainly runtime errors) ?</p> </blockquote> </aside> <p>These errors are up to smart contract developers to return.</p> <aside class="quote no-group" data-username="beltran" data-post="6" data-topic="1170"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img loading="lazy" alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/beltran/48/192_2.png" class="avatar"> beltran:</div> <blockquote> <p>on the topic of out of bounds for example I would leave it to the Solidity developer to signal that a timestamp is too far into the future, rather than hardcoding this limit somewhere.</p> </blockquote> </aside> <p>That was just an example of a case where a contract author might choose to return an error.</p>

5

0

2

25

35

2

false

0

false

null

/t/building-a-taxonomy-of-smart-contract-errors/1170/7

61

1,170

Building a taxonomy of smart contract errors

building-a-taxonomy-of-smart-contract-errors

3,592

8

374

shrugs

Matt Condon

2018-08-30T20:59:29.133Z

<p>I had written up a bunch of general error cases when making <a href="https://vmexceptionwhileprocessingtransactionrevert.com/" rel="nofollow noopener">https://vmexceptionwhileprocessingtransactionrevert.com/</a> so the content of that website might be helpful here.</p>

null

0

20

44

1

false

2

false

null

/t/building-a-taxonomy-of-smart-contract-errors/1170/8

61

25,334

State of EthMag: Sep 2025

state-of-ethmag-sep-2025

61,641

1

2,817

nixo

null

2025-09-03T21:32:49.190Z

<p>For the previous April 2025 update, click <a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/status-ongoing-changes-to-ethmag-proposal-for-more-changes/23360">here</a>.</p> <hr> <h2><a name="p-61641-infra-related-changes-1" class="anchor" href="#p-61641-infra-related-changes-1"></a>Infra-related changes</h2> <p>After outages earlier this year, management of backups, hosting, and performance monitoring was transferred to the Ethereum Foundation Devops team. The transition to a team whose job is to run these services means that we can be better equipped to quickly handle any issues. EthMag is a high point of coordination for research and implementation work on the Ethereum protocol, so it’s essential that its availability is reliable.</p> <p>To this end, two Devops staff were added as admins: <a class="mention" href="/u/elasticroentgen">@ElasticRoentgen</a> & <a class="mention" href="/u/midnite">@midnite</a>. They will be responsible for keeping the forum online and software updated. Updates are regularly done during a maintenance window on Saturdays.</p> <h2><a name="p-61641-transparency-in-moderation-2" class="anchor" href="#p-61641-transparency-in-moderation-2"></a>Transparency in moderation</h2> <h3><a name="p-61641-current-admins-3" class="anchor" href="#p-61641-current-admins-3"></a>Current admins</h3> <ul> <li><a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/u/jpitts">jpitts</a>: Founder of EthMag</li> <li><a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/u/ElasticRoentgen">ElasticRoentgen</a>: EF Devops</li> <li><a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/u/midnite">midnite</a>: EF Devops</li> <li><a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/u/matt">matt</a>: Geth developer</li> <li><a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/u/nicocsgy">nicocsgy</a>: EF Application Support</li> <li><a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/u/nixo">nixo</a>: EF Protocol Support</li> </ul> <h3><a name="p-61641-current-mods-4" class="anchor" href="#p-61641-current-mods-4"></a>Current mods</h3> <ul> <li><a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/u/marcgarreau">marcgarreau</a>: EF Protocol Support, responsible for the protocolbot that connects <a href="https://github.com/ethereum/pm/issues">call issues</a> with ethmag post summaries</li> <li><a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/u/abcoathup">abcoathup</a>: Publisher of <a href="https://x.com/ethdevnews">ethdevnews</a>, highly engaged long-time contributor</li> <li><a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/u/poojaranjan">poojaranjan</a>: Leads <a href="https://x.com/ethdevnews">Ethereum Cat Herders</a>, highly engaged long-time contributor</li> <li><a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/u/anett">anett</a>: Long-time contributor and Ethereum <a href="https://devreladvocate.xyz/">devrel</a></li> </ul> <h3><a name="p-61641-responsibilities-5" class="anchor" href="#p-61641-responsibilities-5"></a>Responsibilities</h3> <p>Admin responsibilities are mostly logistical - keeping the forum online, alerting any current issues, triaging emergencies, deleting spam, promoting user trust levels when new contributors can’t post, etc.</p> <p>Mod responsibilities are more engaged with the day-to-day of the forum. This involves making sure that posts are correctly formatted, users are engaging in productive ways, and that call summaries are being correctly formatted</p> <p>In addition, we have two category-specific moderators in the <a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/c/web/70">Web category</a>:</p> <ul> <li><a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/u/bumblefudge">bumblefudge</a></li> <li><a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/u/ulerdogan">ulerdogan</a></li> </ul> <h2><a name="p-61641-ethmagicians-twitter-account-6" class="anchor" href="#p-61641-ethmagicians-twitter-account-6"></a>EthMagicians Twitter account</h2> <p>The Ethereum Magicians twitter account has been more robustly secured with access to three EF folks: Nixo, Nico Consigny, & Tim Beiko. We’ve already begun to make the account somewhat more active, but would love to improve on it. Feel free to tag the account for RTs   : )</p> <p>And a proposal: I think it would make sense to add one or more of the existing non-EF moderators here as a delegate to the twitter account.</p> <h2><a name="p-61641-moving-forward-7" class="anchor" href="#p-61641-moving-forward-7"></a>Moving forward</h2> <p>The Protocol Support team is actively working on making the Ethereum upgrade process more transparent. We expect this category to stay active while we maintain and improve the protocolbot integrations and call summaries & discussions and EIP proposal discussions happen here.</p> <p>We’d love for the other categories to similarly see active moderation and engagement. If you’re active in ERCs and want to be a category moderator, or have a proposal for a new category that you think could see good activity, please propose it! There’s plenty of room on this forum for more ownership of non-EIP, non-protocol-happenings type content.</p>

null

0

22

159.4

2

true

3

false

null

/t/state-of-ethmag-sep-2025/25334/1

61

25,334

State of EthMag: Sep 2025

state-of-ethmag-sep-2025

61,802

2

303

abcoathup

Andrew B Coathup

2025-09-10T01:35:21.872Z

<p><a class="mention" href="/u/nixo">@nixo</a></p> <h2><a name="p-61802-protocol-calls-1" class="anchor" href="#p-61802-protocol-calls-1"></a>Protocol Calls</h2> <p>Now that <a href="http://forkcast.org">forkcast.org</a> has started adding calls, medium term do we need to also have call information on Eth Magicians?</p> <p>Outstanding is supporting all call types and having a mechanism for call moderators to share action items & decisions. Ideally we would also have a place to link to third party writeups.</p> <p>I wanted a single location to permanently store ACD (and other protocol call) summaries of actions/decisions. (<a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/allcoredevs-network-upgrade-ethmagicians-process-improvements/20157/3">AllCoreDevs, Network Upgrade & EthMagicians Process Improvements - #3 by abcoathup</a>) and started an experiment to use Eth Magicians. I was manually creating a topic per protocol call, making them wiki posts, adding tags, adding links to recordings and summaries (and chasing call moderators for these). (After experimenting with sharing them on Mirror). Prior to that ACD summaries were in a mix of Eth R&D Discord and Twitter, with transcript artifacts stored in Ethereum/pm. <a class="mention" href="/u/nicocsgy">@nicocsgy</a> then started the automation process that <a class="mention" href="/u/wolovim">@wolovim</a> has continued.</p> <p>As an aside, given <a class="mention" href="/u/wolovim">@wolovim</a>’s automation work, I think he should be made an admin.</p> <h2><a name="p-61802-eiperc-discussions-2" class="anchor" href="#p-61802-eiperc-discussions-2"></a>EIP/ERC discussions</h2> <p>Do you see EIP/ERC discussions continuing to remain on Eth Magicians?<br> EIP/ERC process is ripe for some automation and “forkcasting” style magic.</p> <p>Numbers should be issued automatically, discussions topic should be created automagically, AI summaries should be made available.</p> <h2><a name="p-61802-long-term-future-3" class="anchor" href="#p-61802-long-term-future-3"></a>Long term future</h2> <p>Do we need a separate Eth Research & Eth Magicians Discourse forum?<br> Should <a href="http://Ethereum.org">Ethereum.org</a> have a forum that includes this content?</p>

null

1

0

11

157.2

3

true

false

true

3

false

null

/t/state-of-ethmag-sep-2025/25334/2

61

25,334

State of EthMag: Sep 2025

state-of-ethmag-sep-2025

61,872

3

2,817

nixo

null

2025-09-12T00:37:40.147Z

<aside class="quote no-group" data-username="abcoathup" data-post="2" data-topic="25334"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/abcoathup/48/2073_2.png" class="avatar"> abcoathup:</div> <blockquote> <p>do we need to also have call information on Eth Magicians?</p> </blockquote> </aside> <p>personally, i’ve always found ethmag as sort of an ‘intermediate’ place looking for a better solution! Github makes the data organized and queryable but it’s not user-friendly at all. EthMag is a little more user-friendly but it’s a terrible place if you want to systematically access data. I think the sweet spot is going to be storing data in Github and displaying it on Forkcast. I don’t see that as a place to read-write anytime in the near-term.</p> <aside class="quote no-group" data-username="abcoathup" data-post="2" data-topic="25334"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/abcoathup/48/2073_2.png" class="avatar"> abcoathup:</div> <blockquote> <p>I wanted a single location to permanently store ACD (and other protocol call) summaries of actions/decisions. (<a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/allcoredevs-network-upgrade-ethmagicians-process-improvements/20157/3">AllCoreDevs, Network Upgrade & EthMagicians Process Improvements - #3 by abcoathup</a>) and started an experiment to use Eth Magicians.</p> </blockquote> </aside> <p>I’m so glad you did! It was a much more human-readable place to interact with everything and created a bit more motivation to create another solution</p> <aside class="quote no-group" data-username="abcoathup" data-post="2" data-topic="25334"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/abcoathup/48/2073_2.png" class="avatar"> abcoathup:</div> <blockquote> <p>As an aside, given <a class="mention" href="/u/wolovim">@wolovim</a>’s automation work, I think he should be made an admin.</p> </blockquote> </aside> <p>Would be happy to! We just didn’t want to overwhelm the admin cast of characters with our team so soon after the EF helped take over the hosting and security responsibilities, and Marc made it clear that it wasn’t essential to his bot work.</p> <aside class="quote no-group" data-username="abcoathup" data-post="2" data-topic="25334"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/abcoathup/48/2073_2.png" class="avatar"> abcoathup:</div> <blockquote> <p>Do we need a separate Eth Research & Eth Magicians Discourse forum?<br> Should <a href="http://Ethereum.org">Ethereum.org</a> have a forum that includes this content?</p> </blockquote> </aside> <p>I think this is a good long-term goal but it doesn’t necessarily need to lose the history from these two forums - I think we’ll eventually be able to find a solution that retains the history & provides a better UX and I think a natural home for that is <a href="http://ethereum.org">ethereum.org</a> (and would be much easier for people to find!)</p>

2

1

6

66.2

2

true

2

false

null

/t/state-of-ethmag-sep-2025/25334/3

61

25,334

State of EthMag: Sep 2025

state-of-ethmag-sep-2025

61,907

4

9,045

aguzmant103

andyguzmaneth

2025-09-12T18:21:41.034Z

<aside class="quote no-group" data-username="nixo" data-post="3" data-topic="25334"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/nixo/48/13434_2.png" class="avatar"> nixo:</div> <blockquote> <p>I think we’ll eventually be able to find a solution that retains the history & provides a better UX and I think a natural home for that is <a href="http://ethereum.org" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">ethereum.org</a> (and would be much easier for people to find!)</p> </blockquote> </aside> <p>Agreed. I think naturally <a href="http://ethereum.org" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">ethereum.org</a> as a schelling point and might improve discoverability and collaboration if we have these forum discussions there</p>

3

0

1

4

90.8

2

false

2

false

null

/t/state-of-ethmag-sep-2025/25334/4

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,236

1

171

Recmo

Remco Bloemen

2018-07-18T16:13:08.631Z

2024-08-02T11:53:16.635Z

<p>Announcing the formation of a Working Group / Ring for token standards.</p> <p>I’m putting this as a place holder while we gather interest and go through the steps of ring formation (forging?). Let me know if you want to contribute!</p> <p><a class="mention" href="/u/mattlock">@mattlock</a> can I count you in?</p>

null

0

67

882.4

2

false

2

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/1

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,238

2

459

Jason_C

Jason Civalleri (MyCrypto, spl.yt)

2018-07-18T18:26:45.110Z

<p>Hey <a class="mention" href="/u/recmo">@Recmo</a> I’m interested. I have a certain dual-token/non-global-currency-pegged token standard I’ve been developing that may be useful to move through this group. What are your thoughts on how this Ring will form/create direction?</p> <p>Also as your designing your Ring, might be useful to have your feedback on the FEM-Ring definition/criteria we’re designing in <a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/process-for-ring-formation/747">Process for Ring Formation</a> if you’re interested in putting forth your thoughts.</p>

null

0

65

28

2

false

0

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/2

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,253

3

234

mattlock

Matthew David Lockyer

2018-07-18T23:31:59.928Z

2018-07-18T23:32:39.244Z

<p><a class="mention" href="/u/recmo">@Recmo</a> definitely in!</p> <p>Been gathering my thoughts as well as reaching out to some people. Hard while on the road!</p> <p>Will follow up soon! Thanks for setting this placeholder!</p>

null

0

63

17.6

2

false

0

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/3

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,570

4

106

PhABC

Philippe Castonguay

2018-07-26T17:15:50.020Z

2018-07-26T17:17:08.990Z

<p><a class="mention" href="/u/recmo">@Recmo</a></p> <p>Would love to be part of this! Been following token standards pretty closely for sometime ; <a href="https://github.com/PhABC/ethereum-token-standards-list" rel="nofollow noopener">https://github.com/PhABC/ethereum-token-standards-list</a>.</p> <p>Philippe Castonguay (Horizon Games) <a class="mention" href="/u/phabc">@PhABC</a></p>

null

1

0

47

29.4

2

false

0

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/4

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,574

5

566

pabloruiz55

Pablo Ruiz

2018-07-26T20:11:36.016Z

<p>I’d love to be part of this too. Working mostly on how to standardize tokenized securities and exploring different avenues for doing so.</p>

null

0

49

14.8

1

false

0

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/5

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,598

6

234

mattlock

Matthew David Lockyer

2018-07-28T15:21:48.110Z

2018-07-28T15:22:11.777Z

<p>Initial Thoughts on Token Ring Formation:</p> <p><a class="mention" href="/u/recmo">@Recmo</a> thanks for placeholding this topic. Thank you everyone for an amazing time at FEM Council of Berlin, notably <a class="mention" href="/u/jpitts">@jpitts</a> and <a class="mention" href="/u/boris">@boris</a> for organizing, keeping things on track, identifying areas of forward momentum and following up with action and content.</p> <p><strong>Token Ring</strong></p> <p>A working group for EIPs focused on standards and best practices related to tokens.</p> <p><strong>Goals</strong></p> <ul> <li>Establish a process for token standards, specifications, reference implementations and / or working implementations</li> <li>Bring together members of the community to develop and reach consensus on this process in a timely fashion</li> <li>Support new and existing members of the community with their token standards, helping them through the process</li> <li>Provide funding for writers and developers of token standards through a community fund</li> </ul> <p><strong>Early Process Thoughts</strong></p> <p>I’m seeking feedback here as I’m admittedly new to OSS development with this wide of a community and far reaching impact.</p> <p>I have a rough concept that there would be a guiding “fellowship” of 9 members who would oversee the process and move tokens standards along their respective milestones, to be established in a formal process.</p> <p>The fellowship would be responsible for educating the wider public through means of blog posts and other activity, branding themselves as an authority for moving token standards forward.</p> <p>The fellowship would also identify strong community members who contribute frequently to token standards discussions and potentially “resign” and switch their membership. This could also be gracefully forced by other fellowship members, due to a lack of bandwidth and / or contributions from the member in question and seeing a more active participant in the community.</p> <p>The fellowship would manage funds contributed by projects in the space and these would be allocated toward bounties and documentation for specific standards.</p> <p><strong>HOWEVER</strong>, all of these decisions would also be <strong>FIRST</strong> put to a public poll using some off the shelf polling software, e.g. Google Forms and time boxed for efficiency, e.g. 24 hours to vote. Basically, show up, vote on the action item and the fellowship will likely follow the wisdom of the crowd unless something is suspicious, harmful to the community or dangerous.</p> <p><strong>Potential Standards to Workshop Process</strong></p> <ul> <li>ERC-998 Composable Non-Fungible Tokens</li> <li>ERC-1155 Crypto Items Standard</li> <li>…? (suggestions welcome)</li> </ul>

null

4

0

49

189.8

2

false

0

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/6

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,599

7

106

PhABC

Philippe Castonguay

2018-07-28T15:30:00.487Z

<p>Hey Matt, what do you mean by “Potential Standards to Workshop Process”?</p>

null

1

0

36

17.2

2

false

0

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/7

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,600

8

234

mattlock

Matthew David Lockyer

2018-07-28T15:34:50.277Z

<p>These are already proposed standards with a strong use case and community groundswell. We should establish the ring around promoting the development and adoption of these standards, with community input and formalizing our process over the course of moving these standards through that process. A “two birds” idea.</p>

7

1

0

39

22.8

2

false

0

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/8

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,601

9

234

mattlock

Matthew David Lockyer

2018-07-28T15:39:03.627Z

<p>As <a class="mention" href="/u/phabc">@PhABC</a> has mentioned on the NFTy Magicians Discord Channel <span class="hashtag-raw">#standards</span></p> <blockquote> <p>There is now 1155, 1178 & 1203 that have the almost same goal and I feel like more will be coming <img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/joy.png?v=12" title=":joy:" class="emoji" alt=":joy:" loading="lazy" width="20" height="20">. I think we should set a call with everyone so we can find a comon ground somewhere, otherwise we will have like 10 different interfaces that all try to achieve the same thing. Perhaps on the long term it won’t matter (most popular will “win”), but I think we can avoid this by having a group of people comply to the same standard from the get-go. What do you think?</p> </blockquote> <p>This is how we can start within sub-working groups to settle differences and establish the abstract generalizable patterns that are higher level and work on them together.</p> <p>The token ring would provide these groups with guidance, funding, social signalling support and a somewhat “official” seal of progress and approval over time.</p> <p><strong>STRESSING</strong> the fellowship members are not king makers and ultimately everything is open to the community to vote. The idea of the ring is that it includes everyone from the community in the process, the fellowship members would simply enact the interests of the ring.</p>

8

0

38

27.6

2

false

1

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/9

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,602

10

80

boris

Boris Mann

2018-07-28T15:52:12.253Z

<p>Edit that into the wiki here that <a class="mention" href="/u/recmo">@Recmo</a> started --> <a href="https://github.com/ethereum-magicians/scrolls/wiki/Token-Ring" rel="nofollow noopener">https://github.com/ethereum-magicians/scrolls/wiki/Token-Ring</a></p>

6

2

0

38

22.6

2

false

0

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/10

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,604

11

568

mudgen

Nick Mudge

2018-07-28T15:55:58.993Z

<p>Standards can grow like weeds, duplicating themselves and becoming incompatible. I think a ring could help coordinate and channel things to make standards better and provide a way for funding. Sounds good.</p>

6

0

39

12.8

2

false

0

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/11

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,605

12

80

boris

Boris Mann

2018-07-28T15:56:27.769Z

<p>The EIP / ERC process already exists. I would suggest starting there – converging on process especially with interconnected standards will be most useful.</p> <p>The 9 members in particular doesn’t make a lot of sense / isn’t open. Anyone is welcome to submit an ERC, and if it is token standards related, they’ll want to get involved with the Token Ring.</p> <p>Funds, education, etc – up to the Ring, but I’d suggest staying outside the funds thing for now. For starters, you might want to organize a Token Ring Meetup, which will likely need some sponsorship.</p> <p>Public poll: you probably don’t want this <img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/slight_smile.png?v=9" title=":slight_smile:" class="emoji" alt=":slight_smile:"></p>

6

1

0

39

22.8

2

false

0

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/12

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,606

13

568

mudgen

Nick Mudge

2018-07-28T15:57:17.656Z

<p><a class="mention" href="/u/recmo">@Recmo</a> needs to add EIP 998 to the list.</p>

10

0

35

12

2

false

0

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/13

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,608

14

234

mattlock

Matthew David Lockyer

2018-07-28T16:07:16.336Z

<p>Perfect thanks <a class="mention" href="/u/boris">@boris</a>!</p>

10

0

34

11.8

2

false

0

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/14

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,609

15

234

mattlock

Matthew David Lockyer

2018-07-28T16:11:26.694Z

<p>I agree the EIP / ERC standards is a great place to start but I think the process that the token ring would establish is an education, support, social signalling and yes eventually community funding layer on top. I don’t want to re-invent the wheel but I think some “gas” could be spent to help the community:</p> <ul> <li>understand the process more thoroughly</li> <li>participate more actively and clearly through regularly scheduled interactive events</li> <li>receive the support they need to explore standards, crossover, discuss, work together and bring them to completion</li> </ul>

12

1

0

37

22.4

2

false

0

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/15

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,610

16

234

mattlock

Matthew David Lockyer

2018-07-28T16:13:51.654Z

2018-07-28T16:14:58.335Z

<p>I love this list, thanks so much <a class="mention" href="/u/phabc">@PhABC</a> for all the hard work.</p> <p>We should link this up to <a class="mention" href="/u/recmo">@Recmo</a> 's token ring github here: <a href="https://github.com/ethereum-magicians/scrolls/wiki/Token-Ring" rel="nofollow noopener">https://github.com/ethereum-magicians/scrolls/wiki/Token-Ring</a></p> <p>Already done I see… lol</p>

4

0

38

12.6

2

false

0

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/16

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,612

17

80

boris

Boris Mann

2018-07-28T16:38:31.451Z

<p>Everything that you mention here is ideally what the Rings can take on over time, and can share with each other, especially through templates and other materials through meta Rings like Education.</p> <p>Want to get some grants to do those things as Token Ring activities? Great! Just that neither FEM nor Rings are formal entities, so would need to flow through an individual or company.</p>

15

1

0

36

17.2

2

false

0

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/17

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,616

18

569

nathalie-ckc

Nathalie C. Chan King Choy

2018-07-28T22:18:21.607Z

<p>I like the idea of formalizing leadership to ensure longevity, continuity & keep things organized.</p> <p>Was there a particular reason for fixing on 9 members? Did you have particular roles in mind that you wanted filled that make up these 9? (e.g. treasurer, outreach/marketing, education, code maintainers, etc.) Or, did you want to keep it more flexible with a range of min size (to survive) and max size (beyond which decision-making & communication gets overly complex)?</p>

6

1

0

33

16.6

0

false

0

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/18

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,620

19

234

mattlock

Matthew David Lockyer

2018-07-29T14:15:48.654Z

<p>It was more of a odd numbers council and Fellowship of the Ring reference. Definitely flexible!</p>

18

0

31

11.2

2

false

0

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/19

61

798

Forming a ring: Token Standards

forming-a-ring-token-standards

2,621

20

234

mattlock

Matthew David Lockyer

2018-07-29T14:20:12.122Z

<p>Good point on perhaps having a grant to establish Ring activities.</p> <p>The education part is also great. The more the wider community understands what goes on the better. Open source blogging, reporting and documentation of these processes will help with all of that.</p> <p>I understand the need for a formal body if there’s banking involved. However, as I discussed with James from EF Grants and <a class="mention" href="/u/griffgreen">@GriffGreen</a> there could be a multi-sig wallet that is controlled by the members of a ring in order to place ETH / DAI bounties. That was more what I had in mind RE: funding.</p> <ul> <li>community votes</li> <li>ring fellowship scans outcome for suspicious activity / ensures best interests are served</li> <li>ring fellowship places bounty on Gitcoin for example</li> </ul> <p>The token ring would do this once a month to keep a modest flow of activity on the aforementioned blogging and documentation, in addition to the spec and implementation work.</p>

17

1

0

30

636

2

false

0

false

null

/t/forming-a-ring-token-standards/798/20

61

9,405

Relevant token EIPs

relevant-token-eips

25,654

1

4,362

lukehutch

Luke Hutchison

2022-05-28T20:57:52.633Z

2024-08-02T11:53:19.317Z

<p>I’m trying to figure out which EIPs are actually in actual use for fungible tokens, other than ERC20. There are a lot of EIPs for safer token standards. Which of these are worth implementing, either because they are in common use, or because the standard is finalized and there is significant planned use?</p>

null

0

11

27.2

0

false

0

false

null

/t/relevant-token-eips/9405/1

61

22,623

Blob-Parameter-Only (BPO) forks

blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks

55,026

1

1,183

protolambda

2025-01-22T19:07:56.394Z

<p><strong>TL;DR: a framework to safely and continuously scale blobs via Blob-Parameter-Only (BPO) forks</strong></p> <p><em>Sam McIngvale (<a class="mention" href="/u/sammcingvale">@sammcingvale</a>), Mark Tyneway (<a class="mention" href="/u/tynes">@tynes</a>), Proto (<a class="mention" href="/u/protolambda">@protolambda</a>)</em></p> <h3><a name="p-55026-bpo-forks-1" class="anchor" href="#p-55026-bpo-forks-1"></a>BPO forks</h3> <p>BPO forks are simple Ethereum forks that <strong>only</strong> change two parameters: blob targets and blob limits. BPO forks give Ethereum flexibility to safely scale blobs in smaller, more regular increments and they give builders confidence that Ethereum will continuously grow its capacity.</p> <p>Ethereum hard forks carry a high operational cost/ burden. One goal of BPO forks is to share that burden across both L1 and L2 teams. If we can agree on a BPO fork outline, we and other members of the Optimism Collective will lean-in as much as possible to help shepherd these forks forward and scale Ethereum.</p> <h3><a name="p-55026-a-simple-framework-for-bpo-forks-2" class="anchor" href="#p-55026-a-simple-framework-for-bpo-forks-2"></a>A simple framework for BPO forks</h3> <p>There are two generally agreed upon priorities with blobs: 1) ensure solo stakers with limited bandwidth can continue to produce blocks, and 2) provide DA scale to L2s to keep tx costs competitive. More flexibility to tweak blob parameters will help Ethereum thread the needle between the two.</p> <p>We propose three conditions for a BPO fork:</p> <ol> <li>Solo staker minimum bandwidth requirements are generally agreed upon</li> <li>The proposed blob parameter increase can be provably shown to not increase solo staker reorgs</li> <li>Blobs are sustainably congested</li> </ol> <p><strong>Solo staker bandwidth requirements</strong></p> <p>There is <a href="https://x.com/kevaundray/status/1880239190996115581?s=46" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">growing consensus</a> around 50Mbps download and upload speed for solo stakers not using MEV-boost. We look forward to helping solidify alignment around the right long-term bandwidth requirements for solo stakers and continuously re-evaluate due to changing conditions.</p> <p><strong>Blob parameter increase is safe for solo stakers</strong></p> <p>Upload bandwidth mostly varies based on block size. Therefore, a blob parameter increase should be considered safe for solo stakes if the trailing 30d p999 block size plus the size of data given the new blob target fit within the solo staker bandwidth requirements. Francis from Base has a <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/19jZcm5CgWM12Eqg1HRwG_ppd1EL9tduheckBmoFBCNM/edit?pli=1&tab=t.0" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">useful framework</a> for calculating solo staker upload bandwidth requirements.</p> <p><strong>Blobs are sustainably congested</strong></p> <p>Average blob count per block is pegged to the blob target for at least 10 days. See <a href="https://dune.com/hildobby/blobs" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">anytime</a> since Nov 1, 2024.</p> <p>We’d love feedback on how best to bring BPO forks to Ethereum to safely scale blobs! More details here: <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XpV-5BrC2IuNFpRAjvZ8OXmK2YLIbuFMEZpDzziJTvs/edit?usp=sharing" class="inline-onebox" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">BPO Forks - Google Docs</a></p>

null

2

0

104

5,075.8

2

false

12

false

null

/t/blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks/22623/1

61

22,623

Blob-Parameter-Only (BPO) forks

blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks

55,029

2

994

shemnon

Danno Ferrin

2025-01-22T19:32:04.530Z

<p>One of the things that help alleviate anxiety when we had difficulty-bomb only forks was to give them a different naming convention, so when people saw “Grey Glacier Fork” their defenses went down knowing it was only tweaking parameters. Marketing matters for stuff like this, as much as we may want to deny it.</p> <p>I would like to see the EIP proposing the fist such fork (after Pectra) to include a naming convention that can be re-used and aligns with the goals. Stars and Cities and Geology are taken (and show how effective the branding can be).</p>

null

1

0

75

110

2

false

2

false

null

/t/blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks/22623/2

61

22,623

Blob-Parameter-Only (BPO) forks

blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks

55,031

3

7,796

philknows

Phil Ngo

2025-01-22T19:52:46.965Z

<p>Would definitely be supportive of these types of forks to better serve L2s if the testing shows that the parameters are safe for L1 solo operators. There should be no reason why it would take us up to a year to respond to scaling demands when the need is obviously there. It’s pretty simple to do for Lodestar and can be prepped easily in a release to meet a certain date for inclusion.</p>

null

0

62

97.4

2

false

3

false

null

/t/blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks/22623/3

61

22,623

Blob-Parameter-Only (BPO) forks

blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks

55,034

4

12,888

TheGreatAxios

2025-01-22T20:05:49.705Z

<aside class="quote no-group" data-username="protolambda" data-post="1" data-topic="22623"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img loading="lazy" alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/protolambda/48/12139_2.png" class="avatar"> protolambda:</div> <blockquote> <p>g</p> </blockquote> </aside> <p>Is there any clarity/estimates on what the increase in solo staker bandwidth will result in cost wise in the short term?</p>

null

0

1

61

17.2

0

false

0

false

null

/t/blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks/22623/4

61

22,623

Blob-Parameter-Only (BPO) forks

blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks

55,038

5

2,527

rolfyone

Paul Harris

2025-01-22T20:57:02.694Z

<p>So this would be more akin to a fork-choice type upgrade where clients need to coordinate, rather than the traditional hard-fork where we have a ton of features…<br> I think it’s helpful to explore exactly what needs to change overall, as it does appear that we may need to tune this more frequently than the typical fork cadence.</p>

null

0

56

66.2

1

false

0

false

null

/t/blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks/22623/5

61

22,623

Blob-Parameter-Only (BPO) forks

blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks

55,058

6

1,324

timbeiko

Tim Beiko

2025-01-23T14:41:04.904Z

<aside class="quote no-group" data-username="shemnon" data-post="2" data-topic="22623"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img loading="lazy" alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/shemnon/48/14006_2.png" class="avatar"> shemnon:</div> <blockquote> <p>I would like to see the EIP proposing the fist such fork (after Pectra) to include a naming convention that can be re-used and aligns with the goals. Stars and Cities and Geology are taken (and show how effective the branding can be).</p> </blockquote> </aside> <p>From ChatGPT:</p> <p>A simple—and thematically perfect—way to name these <em>blob‐only</em> “BPO” forks is to draw on <strong>celestial “gas clouds”</strong> (nebulae, supernova remnants, etc.). These are literally cosmic <em>blobs</em> of gas, which neatly parallels the idea of scaling up Ethereum’s blob capacity. It also fits right into Ethereum’s established celestial naming style (constellations, Devcon city + star names) while remaining unique to blob forks.</p> <hr> <h2><a name="p-55058-why-nebulae-or-supernova-remnants-1" class="anchor" href="#p-55058-why-nebulae-or-supernova-remnants-1"></a>Why nebulae (or supernova remnants)?</h2> <ul> <li><strong>They are cosmic blobs of gas</strong><br> Nebulae/supernova remnants are some of the closest real‐world analogies to “blobs” in outer space: large, diffuse expansions of matter.</li> <li><strong>They keep you within the “stars/space” naming tradition</strong><br> Ethereum has often used constellations, star names, or cosmic themes. Nebulae and supernova remnants are a natural extension.</li> <li><strong>They convey the idea of scalability & expansion</strong><br> A nebula often leads to star formation—it’s a place of growth and new beginnings in astronomy. Likewise, BPO forks increase Ethereum’s capacity and open new possibilities for rollups.</li> </ul> <p>—</p> <p>Here are five <strong>funkier‐sounding</strong> nebula names, in alphabetical order. They’re all real cosmic gas clouds with memorable, “blob‐friendly” vibes:</p> <ol> <li><strong>Boomerang</strong> (Boomerang Nebula)</li> <li><strong>Flaming Star</strong> (Flaming Star Nebula)</li> <li><strong>Medusa</strong> (Medusa Nebula)</li> <li><strong>Tarantula</strong> (Tarantula Nebula)</li> <li><strong>Witch Head</strong> (Witch Head Nebula)</li> </ol> <p>Each name is short, distinctive, and plays nicely into the cosmic “cloud”/“blob” theme for your BPO forks.</p>

2

0

1

50

175

4

false

2

false

null

/t/blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks/22623/6

61

22,623

Blob-Parameter-Only (BPO) forks

blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks

55,060

7

833

ralexstokes

null

2025-01-23T19:28:38.629Z

<p>i like this a lot!</p> <p>a minor point, but we may also want to keep track of the <code>BLOB_BASE_FEE_UPDATE_FRACTION</code> parameter along with the blob limit and target parameters.</p> <p>raising the target implies changing this update fraction given the way the blob fee market works today if we want changes in the target to have smooth impacts on the blob base fee</p>

null

0

40

83

2

false

3

false

null

/t/blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks/22623/7

61

22,623

Blob-Parameter-Only (BPO) forks

blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks

55,067

8

474

wjmelements

William Morriss

2025-01-23T23:05:22.140Z

<p>Why not manage the blob gas limit like the block gas limit, where each block gets to vote them up or down?</p>

null

0

40

28

2

false

1

false

null

/t/blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks/22623/8

61

22,623

Blob-Parameter-Only (BPO) forks

blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks

55,097

9

2,817

nixo

null

2025-01-25T02:11:47.877Z

2025-01-26T16:50:52.480Z

<aside class="quote no-group" data-username="protolambda" data-post="1" data-topic="22623"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img loading="lazy" alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/protolambda/48/12139_2.png" class="avatar"> protolambda:</div> <blockquote> <p>There is <a href="https://x.com/kevaundray/status/1880239190996115581?s=46" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">growing consensus </a> around 50Mbps download and upload speed for solo stakers not using MEV-boost</p> </blockquote> </aside> <p>I have to push back against the consensus around this number. Median home upload bandwidths available in many very urban locations around the world are below this. Observing just a few from <a href="https://www.speedtest.net/global-index" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">Ookla’s speedtest global index</a>:</p> <ul> <li>New York City: 36.14 Mbps</li> <li>Los Angeles: 21.56 Mbps</li> <li>Helsinki: 46.28 Mbps</li> <li>Berlin: 22.65 Mbps</li> <li>Rome: 46.83 Mbps</li> <li>Brussels: 27.77 Mbps</li> <li>Buenos Aires: 42.96 Mbps</li> <li>Vienna: 32.38 Mbps</li> <li>Montreal: 51.18 Mbps</li> <li>Dublin: 47.30 Mbps</li> <li>Rome: 46.83 Mbps</li> </ul> <p>Given that the U.S. is particularly poor in this regard and that Rated estimates 38% of nodes are operated in the U.S., and that these numbers are medians (so many people are below), I suspect that an assumption of 50 Mbps will result in a not-insignificant number of home stakers struggling and quietly shutting down their nodes.</p> <p>My own node would certainly need to be shut down if the upload bandwidth requirement were increased to 50 Mbps.</p>

null

1

37

47.4

2

true

1

false

null

/t/blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks/22623/9

61

22,623

Blob-Parameter-Only (BPO) forks

blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks

55,104

10

3,992

pauldowman

Paul Dowman

2025-01-26T00:48:11.938Z

<p>I don’t think “average” is what matters. What matters is what’s available for a reasonable cost. Those are median numbers, so by definition half of all internet users have more than that.</p> <p>As a home staker myself I don’t have the same internet as the <em>median</em> household in my town, yet it’s still quite affordable.</p> <p>I don’t think requiring stakers to have something on the high end of home internet is a thread to decentralization.</p>

9

1

0

33

26.6

1

false

0

false

null

/t/blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks/22623/10

61

22,623

Blob-Parameter-Only (BPO) forks

blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks

55,757

11

3,643

jflo

Justin Florentine

2025-02-21T13:43:22.393Z

2025-02-21T13:45:20.768Z

<p>Much of the data cited above comes from areas where telecom services are monopolized. It is not a matter of staker budget, but staker location and market access.</p> <p>BPOs are a good idea, and a capability we should have. The comparison to difficulty-bomb forks is fair. We should have this capability, but I don’t think we are ready to use it yet.</p>

10

0

18

28.6

2

false

0

false

null

/t/blob-parameter-only-bpo-forks/22623/11

61

1,028

Ethereum stratum mining protocol as a standard

ethereum-stratum-mining-protocol-as-a-standard

3,050

1

jpitts

Jeth Pitts

2018-08-12T02:52:25.618Z

<p>Stratum is used for mining pools.</p> <p>NiceHash’s specification for Ethereum stratum mining protocol v1.0.0: <a href="https://github.com/nicehash/Specifications/blob/master/EthereumStratum_NiceHash_v1.0.0.txt" class="inline-onebox">Specifications/EthereumStratum_NiceHash_v1.0.0.txt at master · nicehash/Specifications · GitHub</a></p> <blockquote> <p>Ethereum does not have official stratum protocol. It supports only GetWork, which is very resource hoggy as miners need to constantly poll pool to obtain possible new work. GetWork thus affects performance of miners and pools. Due to demand for more professional Ethereum mining, several versions of “stratum” for Ethereum emerged. These “stratums” utilize GetWork on server side (pool side) to obtain work, which would be fine, if careful considerations and precautions were taken when creating such protocols.</p> </blockquote> <p>NiceHash May 2016 announcement: <a href="https://forum.ethereum.org/discussion/7091/stratum-mining-protocol-for-ethereum" class="inline-onebox">Stratum mining protocol for Ethereum — Ethereum Community Forum</a></p> <p>Bitcoin’s Stratum Protocol: <a href="https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Stratum_mining_protocol" class="inline-onebox">Stratum mining protocol - Bitcoin Wiki</a></p> <p>Bitcoin’s getwork Protocol: <a href="https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Getwork" class="inline-onebox">Getwork - Bitcoin Wiki</a></p>

null

0

23

11,694.6

2

true

0

false

null

/t/ethereum-stratum-mining-protocol-as-a-standard/1028/1

61

1,028

Ethereum stratum mining protocol as a standard

ethereum-stratum-mining-protocol-as-a-standard

3,063

2

23

chfast

Paweł Bylica

2018-08-12T19:26:25.124Z

<p>The EthereumStratum is not the one used the most, but is the only one with any documentation.</p> <p>I proposed a change to the version 1.0.0: <a href="https://github.com/nicehash/Specifications/issues/5" rel="nofollow noopener">https://github.com/nicehash/Specifications/issues/5</a>.</p>

null

0

19

193.8

2

false

1

false

null

/t/ethereum-stratum-mining-protocol-as-a-standard/1028/2

61

7,400

Standardizing DAOs

standardizing-daos

21,571

1

3,956

thelastjosh

Joshua Tan

2021-11-03T21:40:53.454Z

2024-08-02T11:50:56.088Z

<p>Hi folks <img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/wave.png?v=12" title=":wave:" class="emoji" alt=":wave:" loading="lazy" width="20" height="20">, I’m <a>Josh</a>, computer scientist at <a>Metagov</a>.</p> <p>Right now, nobody knows what a DAO is. You walk into a room of 10 experts, and they say 10 different things: it’s a multisig wallet, it’s anything with membership + ragequit, it’s got to have a voting, it doesn’t have to have voting, it’s a complex socio-technical system, it’s a PFP NFT, etc. Simultaneously, there’s been a slow proliferation of stacks / DAO frameworks, with minimal collaboration, interop, or re-use of code / applications between those stacks. All this is creating issues for potential users and for the DAO ecosystem at large. E.g., from Syndicate:</p> <blockquote> <p>“If we can just formalize what a DAO is, that would be incredibly helpful. We’re not confident in building on some of these stacks, because we’re not sure if they’re going to be around in 10 years. We want persistent scripts for persistent organizations. And if your provider disappears, there should be some recourse for you.”</p> </blockquote> <p>Or, from Compound:</p> <blockquote> <p>"The important thing is to build a better ecosystem for DAO developers. How do you bring in the next 1000 devs? To do that, we need a shared set of tools.”</p> </blockquote> <p>To address these problems, Metagov has been running a standards roundtable called <a href="https://daostar.one" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">DAOstar One</a> featuring many organizations in the DAO space (including every major DAO framework), and we’re speccing out a new ERC standard for DAOs—featuring a “minimal DAO” + standard contract interfaces—that we plan to develop and ship over the next 4 months. You can read more details in the <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1P4kAxsi8fRXhWEUbkdeDkc4q2QKSeVrnnAs8ParF4Gs/edit#" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">DAOstar one-pager</a>.</p> <p>Our process is just getting started. For now, I wanted to reach out to the experts in this community to invite your participation (let me know if you’d like to hop in as an invited expert) and to solicit comments. What would you like to see (or not see) in a DAO standard? Do you think something like this is necessary; why or why not? How would you tackle the problem of supporting the existing DAO use-cases without restricting further innovation? As our process develops, I’ll also be posting updates in this thread.</p> <p>Folks like <a class="mention" href="/u/lrettig">@lrettig</a> have told me about how valuable a resource this community is. I would love to work with y’all to figure out the approach for this standard and for DAOs in general. And if you managed to get to the end of this long post, please get in touch <img src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/images/emoji/twitter/smiley.png?v=12" title=":smiley:" class="emoji" alt=":smiley:" loading="lazy" width="20" height="20"> look forward to buidling together!</p> <p><3,<br> Josh</p>

null

0

56

1,051.2

1

false

8

false

null

/t/standardizing-daos/7400/1

61

7,400

Standardizing DAOs

standardizing-daos

22,824

2

4,582

j0xhn

John D. Storey

2022-01-23T08:43:09.902Z

<p>This is very interesting indeed! I’ve been thinking through my system for how I’d standardize DAOs and am setting up an official EIP at <a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/eip-1776-erc20dao-extend-any-dao-framework-to-be-a-legally-empowered-erc20-compliant-token/8078" class="inline-onebox">EIP-1776 : ERC20DAO : Extend any DAO framework to be a legally empowered erc20 compliant token</a></p> <p>Will look more into this DAOstar project and see how it integrates. Do you have access to their team or other DAO teams that would be interested in contributing, validating and expanding upon this base?</p>

null

1

0

34

51.8

0

false

2

false

null

/t/standardizing-daos/7400/2

61

7,400

Standardizing DAOs

standardizing-daos

22,876

3

3,956

thelastjosh

Joshua Tan

2022-01-25T12:51:50.434Z

<p>Thanks for sharing this! We’re not going down the road of legal compliance with this standard but have discussed some ideas related to it in the DAO*1 roundtable. In the meantime, we should have a draft of the standard up and ready to share in this forum next week.</p>

2

0

35

52

1

false

1

false

null

/t/standardizing-daos/7400/3

61

7,400

Standardizing DAOs

standardizing-daos

23,306

4

3,956

thelastjosh

Joshua Tan

2022-02-12T19:33:13.341Z

<p>Hi everyone,</p> <p>We just posted a “working paper” version of the DAO standard here: <a href="https://daostar.notion.site/EIP-1234-Decentralized-Autonomous-Organizations-Working-Paper-c89409d239004f41bd06cb21852e1684" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">EIP-1234 Decentralized Autonomous Organizations</a>!</p> <p><strong>Short summary</strong>: A standard URI and JSON schema for decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs), focusing on relating on-chain and off-chain representations of membership and proposals.</p> <p><strong>Why we need it now</strong>: The working paper has a longer rationale that you can read, but based on the past four months of roundtable conversations with frameworks, tooling developers, and DAOs, there is strong consensus across the ecosystem that a daoURI + JSON schema, similar to tokenURI, is immediately useful and a great first step toward other DAO standards.</p> <p>For those of you at ETH Denver next week, we will be presenting the draft at Schelling Point & ETH Denver. We’ll also be setting up a series of community calls to invite comment + discussion, and will post more details the week after next.</p> <p>Cheers,<br> Josh, Isaac, Ido, Zargham, Eyal, Sam, and many others on the DAOstar team</p>

null

0

29

95.8

1

false

3

false

null

/t/standardizing-daos/7400/4

61

11,625

Idea: Buy and Sell Limited Token (Feedback Appreciated)

idea-buy-and-sell-limited-token-feedback-appreciated

30,658

1

6,684

cvensand

Christopher Vensand

2022-11-05T22:41:05.357Z

2024-08-02T11:52:54.306Z

<p>Hi Ethereum Community! I wanted to get feedback on an idea for a new ERC token standard. The idea is to create a token that is limited to only being sold and bought on-chain and not allowed to be directly transferred between addresses.</p> <p><strong>TLDR</strong><br> After exploring different token standards like <a href="https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-721" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">ERC-721</a>, <a href="https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1155" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">ERC-1155</a> and <a href="https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-2981" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">ERC-2981</a> I could not find a suitable standard to guarantee that if an NFT token is resold the creator receives a portion of the resale value. <a href="https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-2981" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">ERC-2981</a> offers a standardized way to retrieve royalty payment information, however it does not provide a way to enforce this payment. Creating a new token standard that records sale price on-chain and limits the token to only being sold and bought would enable royalty payments to be collected without 3rd party involvement.</p> <p><strong>Motivation:</strong><br> Digital marketplaces like the <a href="https://steamcommunity.com/market/" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">Steam Community Market</a> are a great way for players to exchange in-game items and allow the developer (Valve in this case) to receive a portion of the resale. Having this marketplace provides a large amount of value to the players because they can trade with each other and value to the developer because they can use the fees as a way to continue developing the game.</p> <p>However, these traditional centralized marketplaces have multiple problems.</p> <ol> <li>You need to trust in a central 3rd party (Valve in my example)</li> <li>You cannot take your money out of the marketplace after it has been deposited</li> <li>Players use blackmarket trading sites to avoid resale fees</li> </ol> <p>Current token standards allow organizations to create marketplaces that remove problems 1 and 2, but problem 3 is still unavoidable. By allowing addresses to freely transfer tokens we cannot assume the intention of a token transfer. The transfer could have been initiated for numerous reasons other than the sale of a token allowing bad actors to handle payments off-chain. This makes it impossible to collect resale fees without 3rd party involvement.</p> <p>If it were possible to record sale price on-chain and remove the ability to directly transfer tokens, it would be possible to avoid problem 3. Every token sale could be handled by a smart contract that would properly distribute funds to the intended parties. If someone tried to sell their token for much less than what it was worth, potentially handling funds off-chain for the sale, they would not be able guarantee that the person they were working with could purchase the item. Anyone listening to the chain would be able to fill the order.</p> <p><strong>Reference Implementation v0.1</strong></p> <pre><code class="lang-auto">/// Emitted when the sell function is called /// @param _from The address of the token owner /// @param _tokenId The token type being transferred /// @param _price The price offered to sell the token event Sell(address indexed _from, uint256 _tokenId, uint256 _price); /// Emitted when the buy function is called /// @param _from The address of the token owner /// @param _tokenId The token type being transferred /// @param _price The price the token was sold for event Buy(address indexed _from, uint256 _tokenId, uint256 _price); /// Modifies the token to be for sale and sets the price function sell(address indexed _seller, uint256 _tokenId, uint256 _price); /// Transfers token to buyer, pays seller and modifies the token to not be for sale function buy(address indexed _buyer, uint256 _tokenId, uint256 _price) external payable; /// Returns if the token is for sale function forSale() public view returns (bool) /// Returns the price needed to buy the token function price() public view returns (uint256) /// Returns the token that can be used for payment function acceptablePayment() public view returns (uint256 tokenId) /// Returns the last price the token was sold for function lastPrice() public view returns (uint256) /// Finds the owner of the token function ownerOf() external view returns (address); </code></pre> <p><a href="https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-721" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">ERC-721</a> was referenced when creating this example.</p> <p><strong>Outstanding thoughts:</strong></p> <p>It seems like we would have to enforce what token the creator accepts as payment before it is minted. If we do not, then it would be easy to create a new ERC-20 token with no value and use it as payment for a sale.</p> <p><strong>Next Steps:</strong></p> <p>Thank you <a class="mention" href="/u/chriswong">@ChrisWong</a> for writing such a nice idea document that I could use as a template.</p><aside class="quote quote-modified" data-post="1" data-topic="11262"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img loading="lazy" alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/chriswong/48/7417_2.png" class="avatar"> <a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/idea-p2p-soulbound-token-call-for-a-better-name/11262">Idea: P2P SoulBound Token (Call For A Better Name!)</a> <a class="badge-category__wrapper " href="/c/magicians/primordial-soup/9"><span data-category-id="9" style="--category-badge-color: #AB9364; --category-badge-text-color: #FFFFFF; --parent-category-badge-color: #0088CC;" data-parent-category-id="61" data-drop-close="true" class="badge-category --has-parent" title="For discussions of potential standards or potential technical solutions, or topics which do not have a category"><span class="badge-category__name">Primordial Soup</span></span></a> </div> <blockquote> Hi Eth Magicians, I wanted to share some thoughts on a new pattern regarding ERC1155, or NFT that is 1.) non-transferrable (a.k.a soul bound) and can only be minted with signatures from all agreed addresses. TLDR Using ERC-1155 as a social footprint to represent interaction among a small set of addresses. When all participant agrees on such action, and provide the signatures; A mint can be initialised. Once minted, these tokens would be burnable, but not transferable. Motivation: Social inte… </blockquote> </aside>

null

2

0

21

109.2

1

false

1

false

null

/t/idea-buy-and-sell-limited-token-feedback-appreciated/11625/1

61

11,625

Idea: Buy and Sell Limited Token (Feedback Appreciated)

idea-buy-and-sell-limited-token-feedback-appreciated

30,733

2

6,045

magicintern

Hiren Pandya

2022-11-07T21:33:26.121Z

<p>Thank you for the detailed writeup this is my first attempt at asking questions to clarify things before I assume anything. Hopefully, this can translate into some good contributions.</p> <aside class="quote no-group quote-modified" data-username="cvensand" data-post="1" data-topic="11625"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img loading="lazy" alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/cvensand/48/7672_2.png" class="avatar"> cvensand:</div> <blockquote> <p>Creating a new token standard that records the sale price on-chain and limits the token to only being sold and bought would enable royalty payments to be collected without 3rd party involvement.</p> </blockquote> </aside> <p>So as an average user of NFTs, I can perform two of the following things:</p> <ol> <li>I can sell it on the secondary market</li> <li>Transfer it between my wallets for other reasons</li> </ol> <p>For point 2, I don’t suppose there’s a way we can verify whether the transfer that happened was as part of a sale or not (if they don’t use marketplace and custom exchange contracts)</p> <p>If those are the two events we’re trying to state and allow later if we need to know if it was a sale or transfer, can these two methods be combined under one name (it represents the same thing - a sale happened)</p> <pre><code class="lang-auto">event Sell(address indexed _from, uint256 _tokenId, uint256 _price); event Buy(address indexed _from, uint256 _tokenId, uint256 _price); </code></pre> <pre><code class="lang-auto">/// Emitted when a sale happens (bought or sold) event Sale(address indexed _from, uint256 _tokenId, uint256 _price); /// Transfer event that we already have in erc721 event Transfer(address indexed _from, address indexed _to, uint256 _tokenId); </code></pre> <p>Not sure if this is the correct way to think about it.</p>

null

1

13

7.6

1

false

0

false

null

/t/idea-buy-and-sell-limited-token-feedback-appreciated/11625/2

61

11,625

Idea: Buy and Sell Limited Token (Feedback Appreciated)

idea-buy-and-sell-limited-token-feedback-appreciated

30,856

3

6,684

cvensand

Christopher Vensand

2022-11-10T16:28:27.306Z

<p>Hello! With this new token you would not be able to directly transfer it between wallets, so point 2 would not be possible.</p> <p>You would be able to transfer this token indirectly by calling the <code>sell()</code> function. This function would change the <code>forSale</code> variable to <code>True</code> which would allow anyone on the network to call the <code>buy()</code> function to buy the token.</p>

2

0

11

2.2

1

false

0

false

null

/t/idea-buy-and-sell-limited-token-feedback-appreciated/11625/3

61

11,625

Idea: Buy and Sell Limited Token (Feedback Appreciated)

idea-buy-and-sell-limited-token-feedback-appreciated

30,861

4

6,045

magicintern

Hiren Pandya

2022-11-10T19:25:22.431Z

<p>Thank you for details</p> <aside class="quote no-group" data-username="cvensand" data-post="1" data-topic="11625"> <div class="title"> <div class="quote-controls"></div> <img loading="lazy" alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://ethereum-magicians.org/user_avatar/ethereum-magicians.org/cvensand/48/7672_2.png" class="avatar"> cvensand:</div> <blockquote> <p>The idea is to create a token that is limited to only being sold and bought on-chain and not allowed to be directly transferred between addresses.</p> </blockquote> </aside> <p>I should’ve reread this, but I get the point.</p>

null

0

1

9

21.8

1

false

1

false

null

/t/idea-buy-and-sell-limited-token-feedback-appreciated/11625/4

61

8,451

Where is 'uint256[] memory tokenTraits' defined in this NFT contract?

where-is-uint256-memory-tokentraits-defined-in-this-nft-contract

23,627

1

4,750

RustBucket45

null

2022-02-28T15:57:31.753Z

2022-02-28T16:02:57.398Z

<p>Hello,</p> <p>I’m looking into NFT contracts and I am analyzing the infamous CREEPZ INVASION GROUNDS contract.</p> <p>Viewable at <a href="https://etherscan.io/address/0xc3503192343eae4b435e4a1211c5d28bf6f6a696#code" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">https://etherscan.io/address/0xc3503192343eae4b435e4a1211c5d28bf6f6a696#code</a></p> <p>On line 307 of CBCStaking.sol, the function _setTokensValues takes two arrays from memory as arguments, which are used to set the yield value ($loomi token) for a staked NFT. They are uint256[] memory tokenIds, and uint256[] memory tokenTraits.</p> <pre><code class="lang-auto">function _setTokensValues( address contractAddress, uint256[] memory tokenIds, uint256[] memory tokenTraits ) internal { require(tokenIds.length == tokenTraits.length, "Wrong arrays provided"); for (uint256 i; i < tokenIds.length; i++) { if (tokenTraits[i] != 0 && tokenTraits[i] <= 3000 ether) { _tokensMultiplier[contractAddress][tokenIds[i]] = tokenTraits[i]; } } } </code></pre> <p>How was data first input into those arrays? Where are they first defined? tokenTraits[] in particular only exists in CBCStaking.sol as arguments for functions. Outside of that it is not present in any other creepz contracts.</p> <p>How do they do it? If they are derived from the metadata somehow, where is the function responsible</p>

null

0

14

77.8

0

false

0

false

null

/t/where-is-uint256-memory-tokentraits-defined-in-this-nft-contract/8451/1

61

8,451

Where is 'uint256[] memory tokenTraits' defined in this NFT contract?

where-is-uint256-memory-tokentraits-defined-in-this-nft-contract

27,067

2

5,777

weiscracker

Weiscracker

2022-07-23T13:21:38.896Z

<p>It’s provided to the “deposit” function which in turn calls _setTokensValues. Your clues are the _ in front of the function name which can indicate something is an internal function or variable, and the fact that _setTokensValues is declared as an internal function. This means it only gets called by another function inside the same contract. So it looks like this is done via website most likely and they call the deposit function with the “correct” traits and sign it so that the contract knows it came from the website and not me or you spoofing the “wrong” traits.</p>

null

0

7

6.4

0

false

0

false

null

/t/where-is-uint256-memory-tokentraits-defined-in-this-nft-contract/8451/2

61

23,813

Centralized Sequencer Security vs. On-Chain Trust Networks

centralized-sequencer-security-vs-on-chain-trust-networks

57,888

1

5,436

peersky

null

2025-04-24T05:29:52.457Z

2025-04-24T05:48:44.711Z

<p>Many security companies today are adopting a centralized, sequencer-based security approach for Layer 2 solutions. Some examples include:</p> <ul> <li><strong>Forta:</strong> (An OpenZeppelin spinoff - hello to my ex-colleagues!) - <a href="https://www.forta.org/" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">Forta Firewall</a></li> <li><strong>Ironblocks:</strong> <a href="https://www.ironblocks.com/#detection-anchor" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">Rollup Guard</a></li> <li><strong>Blockaid:</strong> Incorporates similar concepts in its solutions.</li> <li>Countless startups are now emerging, building variations of this “AI security” model.</li> </ul> <h2><a name="p-57888-motivation-1" class="anchor" href="#p-57888-motivation-1"></a>Motivation</h2> <p>While many of these sequencer-based solutions are advertised primarily as “security,” I the motivation is twofold. Firstly, it’s an obvious path towards achieving <strong>compliance</strong>, which is often seen as a prerequisite for broader institutional adoption by end-users. The ability to enforce rules at a central point is arguably necessary if the Ethereum ecosystem aims for mainstream acceptance beyond its current niche. A clear application of this approach is providing a central actor to validate transaction inclusion in L2s, as exemplified by Zircuit’s <a href="https://www.zircuit.com/blog/the-sequencer-level-security-paper-is-out" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">Sequencer-Level Security paper</a>.</p> <p>However, there’s a <strong>darker side to this motivation</strong> that security firms might not readily discuss: the security business in crypto has been exceptionally profitable, potentially <em>the</em> most profitable sector. Offering a centralized sequencer scanner as a service fits perfectly into this context. It relies on proprietary infrastructure built around a relatively simple concept, creating intellectual property that can be readily capitalized upon.</p> <p>My concern is that even if this approach harms the long-term decentralization and core principles of Ethereum, these firms may pursue and lobby for it because their primary interest lies in USD revenue accumulating in fiat bank accounts, not necessarily the health of the ETH ecosystem.</p> <p><em>Hence, while input from “security experts” on this topic is welcome, I suggest taking it with a grain of salt, considering potential conflicts of interest.</em></p> <h2><a name="p-57888-pros-cons-of-centralized-sequencing-2" class="anchor" href="#p-57888-pros-cons-of-centralized-sequencing-2"></a>Pros & Cons of Centralized Sequencing</h2> <ul> <li><strong>Pros:</strong> <ul> <li>Can prevent malicious transactions from appearing on-chain, potentially negating damage before it occurs.</li> <li>Relatively quick to implement for most rollup frameworks.</li> <li>Does not directly incur extra gas costs on-chain for the end-user.</li> <li>Does not require adjustments to existing smart contract code (on specifically designed rollups).</li> <li>Provides a clear business model for security firms collaborating with centralized sequencer operators and institutions.</li> </ul> </li> <li><strong>Cons:</strong> <ul> <li>It’s quick to implement partly because it often relies on traditional Web2 infrastructure (potentially less reliable, certainly less transparent).</li> <li>Introduces a central point of <strong>censorship</strong> (potentially enabling scenarios far removed from Web3 ideals, like selling a fiat bank account experience disguised as Web3).</li> <li>Weakens Ethereum’s key differentiator: if a central entity can override transactions, the “smart contracts are law” principle is compromised.</li> <li>Doesn’t inherently solve L1 compliance issues.</li> <li>Accounting for the scanner’s operational costs (often passed indirectly, perhaps via MEV, staking arrangements, or other fees) can be opaque and questionable.</li> <li><strong>False positives can be exceptionally destructive.</strong> Even a mistaken flag from a wallet extension (like <a href="https://x.com/iampeersky/status/1904777803721302141" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">this example I encountered</a>) gives developers an immediate taste of how easily they can be blocked from reaching users.</li> <li>Misses (malicious transactions that bypass the filter) can still cause critical damage, especially if not anticipated at the smart contract layer. <ul> <li>The definition of a “significant loss” or “malicious activity” is determined by the sequencer operator, not the user or asset owner. This leaves room for major hacks targeting new or unconventional asset types to slip through if they don’t fit the operator’s predefined criteria.</li> <li>I’d argue this situation might inadvertently benefit security firms; as the sums lost in hacks grow (like the recent ByBit case), the demand (in USD) for perceived “better” solutions increases, fueling a cycle of “re-inventions of the wheel” that prioritize central control.</li> </ul> </li> </ul> </li> </ul> <h2><a name="p-57888-alternative-smart-contract-based-networks-of-trust-3" class="anchor" href="#p-57888-alternative-smart-contract-based-networks-of-trust-3"></a>Alternative: Smart Contract-Based Networks of Trust</h2> <p>Examples of on-chain, smart contract-based compliance mechanisms that can work even on L1 exist today. Notable instances include Circle’s <a href="https://etherscan.io/token/0xa0b86991c6218b36c1d19d4a2e9eb0ce3606eb48#writeProxyContract" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">USDC blacklist functionality</a> and Chainalysis’s implementation of the <a href="https://etherscan.io/address/0x40c57923924b5c5c5455c48d93317139addac8fb" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">OFAC sanctions list</a>. Security councils operating pause/emergency upgrade functions in DeFi protocols also fall into this category.</p> <ul> <li><strong>Pros:</strong> <ul> <li><strong>Transparent and Reliable:</strong> Operates on-chain, inheriting blockchain properties.</li> <li><strong>Upholds Ethereum’s Core Value:</strong> Reinforces the principle that “smart contract code is law” (akin to Bitcoin’s “not your keys, not your coins,” Ethereum’s equivalent is the immutability and predictability of code).</li> <li><strong>L1 Applicable:</strong> Can be implemented directly on Layer 1, without requiring L2 sequencer control.</li> <li><strong>Enshrines L1 Usage:</strong> Drives demand for block space, potentially funding security through gas fees spent on valuable computation rather than just memecoins.</li> <li><strong>Direct Cost Alignment:</strong> Transaction costs directly cover the smart contract execution expenses related to security/compliance.</li> <li><strong>Accountable Revenue Distribution:</strong> Models like distributor contracts (e.g., in my <a href="https://github.com/peeramid-labs/eds" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">EDS project</a>) can use DLT to transparently account for oracle/security provider revenue.</li> <li><strong>User-Defined Security:</strong> With proper design, can ensure that “significant loss” is defined by the asset owner’s configured policies via smart contracts, preventing unexpected large failures for specific assets.</li> </ul> </li> <li><strong>Cons:</strong> <ul> <li>Achieving preventative guarantees similar to centralized sequencers often requires security wrappers or modifications to existing smart contracts, adding complexity.</li> <li><strong>Transparency is a double-edged sword:</strong> Attackers can also analyze the on-chain security logic.</li> <li>Requires substantial smart contract library development, facing the classic <strong>public goods funding problem</strong>. It’s unclear how to finance this foundational work.</li> <li><strong>Increased gas costs</strong>, more cross-contract calls, and potentially larger deployment bytecode size.</li> <li>The current Solidity developer experience <a href="https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/long-term-l1-execution-layer-proposal-replace-the-evm-with-risc-v/23617/65">could certainly be improved</a> to better handle the development of complex, secure systems.</li> <li>Less obvious direct business model for traditional security firms; potentially reduces the need for numerous jurisdiction-specific L2s (which could be seen as positive or negative depending on your perspective on L2 proliferation).</li> </ul> </li> </ul> <h2><a name="p-57888-mitigating-the-cons-of-on-chain-trust-4" class="anchor" href="#p-57888-mitigating-the-cons-of-on-chain-trust-4"></a>Mitigating the Cons of On-Chain Trust</h2> <p>I argue that, with careful design and leveraging recent advancements, the “Cons” of the smart contract approach can be mitigated:</p> <ul> <li><strong>Privacy:</strong> Technologies like <a href="https://github.com/zama-ai/fhevm-solidity" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">Zama’s work on fhEVM</a> enable Fully Homomorphic Encryption on-chain. This allows private logic for security oracles or compliance checks, mitigating the risk of attackers analyzing the defenses while maintaining verifiability.</li> <li><strong>Implementation Complexity:</strong> My initiative on the <a href="https://github.com/peersky/eds" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">Ethereum Distribution System (EDS)</a> aims to enable “trusted networks” (conceptually similar to traditional VPNs but on-chain). Security wrappers could potentially be implemented more easily within these networks and might even work for existing codebases with minimal changes.</li> <li><strong>Gas Costs:</strong> Increased gas costs resulting from valuable on-chain security can be viewed positively as healthy ecosystem demand for block space. <em>I believe we should think in terms of “if applications need more gas for essential functions like security, Ethereum must evolve to provide it efficiently,” rather than avoiding on-chain solutions solely due to current gas limitations.</em></li> <li><strong>Standardization & Trust:</strong> Software factories and trusted registries acting as on-chain gateways can help ensure that whatever logic a user interacts with corresponds to established compliance or security standards not just from institutional side, but also from user acceptance of such rules.</li> <li><strong>Security Firm Role:</strong> Security firms can still play a vital role. They could build and manage sophisticated on-chain firewall contracts, offer L1 transaction signing services (perhaps enhanced by proposals like EIP-7702), and contribute expertise to the design and auditing of these trusted smart contract networks.</li> </ul> <h2><a name="p-57888-the-path-forward-funding-challenges-5" class="anchor" href="#p-57888-the-path-forward-funding-challenges-5"></a>The Path Forward & Funding Challenges</h2> <p>The public goods funding and sustainable business model aspect remains largely unresolved for the on-chain approach. I’ve implemented much of EDS myself using personal funds, driven by my belief in this direction. However, it’s a complex system and not yet ready for large-scale production use without broader ecosystem support. Acting mostly as a solitary researcher, bringing it to a production-ready state is challenging.</p> <p>For instance, a proposal for <a href="https://forum.safe.global/t/support-eds-development-for-safe/6432/" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">Safe DAO to support EDS development</a> has faced difficulties gaining traction. We also received rejections from Gitcoin OSS Tooling rounds and the Ethereum Foundation’s Ecosystem Support Program (ESP), with feedback sometimes citing metrics like low GitHub star counts – highlighting the hurdles in bootstrapping foundational infrastructure without initial backing.</p> <p>Perhaps there are other promising approaches emerging? Could we potentially write sequencer-level or even beacon chain Rust contracts for compliance and security that maintain decentralization guarantees? I’m very open to discussing thoughts and alternative ideas on how we can build a more secure <em>and</em> decentralized future for Ethereum.</p>

null

0

8

196.6

2

false

0

false

null

/t/centralized-sequencer-security-vs-on-chain-trust-networks/23813/1

61

8,499

ERC20 with built in fee structure?

erc20-with-built-in-fee-structure

23,708

1

4,846

Bschuster3434

Brian Schuster

2022-03-02T23:40:29.972Z

<p>Hey folks,</p> <p>I’m looking to see if there are any standards or proposals around a token that upon sending pays a fee to another address? An example would be a token that automatically pays 1% of the total transaction amount to a predetermined contract or wallet.</p> <p>I did some searching through the EIP standards but didn’t see much.</p> <p>As a reference, here is my solidity code with an early implementation of this idea: <a href="https://github.com/Bschuster3434/Comrade-Token" class="inline-onebox" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">GitHub - Bschuster3434/Comrade-Token: Open Source Repository for the Automatically Redistributing Comrade Token</a></p> <p>Here’s an example of what this looks like on Polygon: <a href="https://mumbai.polygonscan.com/address/0x70e4a39e46695c42f5dd7821b3c32af4b4a8253a" class="inline-onebox" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">Contract Address 0x70e4a39e46695c42f5dd7821b3c32af4b4a8253a | PolygonScan</a></p> <p>Any thoughts for feedback would be appreciated.</p>

null

1

0

21

544.2

1

false

0

false

null

/t/erc20-with-built-in-fee-structure/8499/1

61

8,499

ERC20 with built in fee structure?

erc20-with-built-in-fee-structure

23,716

2

916

auryn

Auryn Macmillan

2022-03-03T16:40:44.633Z

<p>The <a href="https://github.com/cultdao-developer/cultdao/blob/main/contracts/cult.sol" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">CULT token</a> does this.</p> <p>I’m not aware of any standard for this type of fee collection though.</p> <p>Worth pointing out that it’s trivial to circumvent this type of fee, simply by wrapping the token. If the token gains any kind of traction, there will almost certainly emerge a market for a wrapped version of this token that circumvents the fee.</p>

null

0

17

8.4

2

false

0

false

null

/t/erc20-with-built-in-fee-structure/8499/2