a propaganda baseada, nativa e imutável do rollup não vai pa | mteamisloading no Binance Square

Página Inicial

Artigos Populares

Favoritos e Gostos

Centro de Criador

--

a propaganda baseada, nativa e imutável do rollup não vai parar até que a moral melhore

Aviso Legal: inclui opiniões de terceiros. Não se trata de aconselhamento financeiro. Poderá incluir conteúdos patrocinados. Consulta os Termos e Condições.

0

0

Fica a saber as últimas notícias sobre criptomoedas

⚡️ Participa nas mais recentes discussões sobre criptomoedas

💬 Interage com os teus criadores preferidos

👍 Desfruta de conteúdos que sejam do teu interesse

E-mail/Número de telefone

Criador Relevante

@mteamisloading

Explorar Mais do Criador

Only 2% of validators have consolidated stake since Pectra and EIP 7251. Validator count has actually increased since Pectra after an initial decline. This is important for L1 scaling, we need to up the social pressure on this.

--

6s slot times sound great. Very pro Ethereum prioritizing this for Glamsterdam. With that being said, scaling blob capacity should not be neglected until we have the best DA possible with the existing Ethereum nodes.

--

A couple weeks ago a debate between @smyyguy and @_Jonahw aired on @theempirepod . Jonah made a point along the lines of: we need to forecast a forex rate when doing a DCF because yield for stakers is native yield (denominated in the staking token of the L1, not in USD). Dan returned that forecasts for amount of activity is often denominated in USD. He also makes the point that native token price doesn't proportionally affect that amount of activity in USD (i.e. 10% drop in ETH doesn't mean 10% drop in USD denominated amount of activity). Combined these indicate that the forex rate is kinda being double counted and thus doesn't need to be considered in the DCF. Jonah kinda dodged this point and emphasized that stakers are getting the native asset, not USD. I think this misses Dan's point by not getting at the idea that future cash flows are not (entirely) denominated in the native asset, so there is inherently some exchange rate already. I think it's interesting to think about my own user behaviors. I still think about gas fees in USD (i.e. subcent fees on Base is better than 30c on mainnet, not ETH). My demand to transact on Ethereum, though, isn't really denominated in ETH or USDC, it's denominated in the utility that it provides to me and the opportunity cost of the fees i need to pay. For example I spend much more freely from a crypto debit card I have vs a bank-issued card I have. It's the same USD cost, but it's annoying to withdraw to my bank. On the other hand, I have no idea how this translate to analyzing a population of users' aggregate demand to transact—could be much different from a macro perspective.

--

All the smartest people I know in crypto listen to crypto podcasts regularly

--

testnet infra wasn't working so we're testing on mainnet i love this company

--

Últimas Notícias

Federal Reserve's Bostic Anticipates Rate Cut Later This Year

--

JustLendDAO Proposes Changes to USDJ Market Parameters

--

Public Companies Increase Cryptocurrency Reserves in 2025

--

Potential Dollar Decline Linked to Federal Reserve Testimony

--

Japan Considers Regulatory Shift for Crypto Assets

--

Preferências de cookies

Termos e Condições da Plataforma

Termos e Condições da Plataforma

Preferências de cookies