Oceans of Wisdom

seems basically nuts to imagine "no, we of all people cannot have an NFT"

should we be able to represent an NFT?

i think some basics you have to be able to represent

and that is it

or whatever

there are x native functions (e.g. 10)

there are no contracts

like it is impossible actually impossible to have a malicious contract

you are order getting orders of magnitude simplification within each vertical because: - you don't have arbitrary code of which 1 version of 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 etc etc versions of the code happens to be an order book - and even further it is not like there are xxx versions of an order book - and also you are doing 10 things not 10,000 things so the design space, complexity, auditability, things that can go wrong, speed of computation is orders of magnitude of complexity lower than ETH

i think

to do something basic like "buy your gas token"

you can't be totally dependent on someone else's chain

you don't know if the super chain will have cheap computation

this is my current project

and something something something lots of magic with ZK Proofs

I think native items are: 1/ identity (ENS equivalent, but multi-address, multi-chain,etc covered already -> extension of ID, TDH, rep etc) 2/ basic order book 3/ bridges (again anyway we are going to do this at a more general level so this is fine) 4/ NFT contracts (with all the trimmings - need this for sure) 5/ token contracts (tbd but probably) 6/ lending (tbd but probably) doesn't that cover 95% of what people do on a blockchain anyway and you can do it with <10 native optimized ops

definitely will not support EVM contracts

yes the whole concept of the blockchain is just state changes

yes ofc ETH too

so this is a trustless bridge for USDT/USDC or whatever

because in principle people should be able to buy the token on its own chain

for people to be able to bridge in the other direction too

you can think about what that should look like too

I think on our network we have a simple prebuilt AMM (no arbitrary deployment, just built into the protocol)

and less differentiated

there is nothing more boring

i absolutely 100% am certain we do not want to be playing the "oh get EVM TVL on our chain"

so among all of those, we can also bridge the token

our whole thing is "we do trustless bridges to mainnet"

for the token

if you want DeFi liquidity, we do a trustless bridge to mainnet

nobody needs another EVM

is considered to be borderline crazy person

brand new from scratch from first principles special purpose blockchain

almost every team the last x years doing an L1 or L0 has picked an existing model EVM mostly, sometimes SVM to just port

so anyway feeling good the last 2 days thinking about this

to be chasing someone else's road map

feels very not sovereign

and also "I do not see how our blockchain will be able to keep up with some other blockchain's roadmap" which in the case of ETH is always hyper complicated and brainiac

but I also feel quite a bit of technical validation of "man, I do not want our validators to have to support all that"

he is right and I applaud him for thinking boldly

https://x.com/VitalikButerin/status/1918562016329162844

and the reason I am taking the victory lap now is, well, apparently EVM is too complicated for....... ... ... ... Ethereum itself!

we had a looooooot of team discussion about whether 6529 blockchain should be an EVM (some other team members) or something more simple (me)

I have to wake up at an ungodly hour tomorrow to catch a flight so I am not getting dragged into long chats, but I am here to take a mental victory lap on a deep topic

No

True

This is the one

By voting

Exactly