New paper on ZK rollups just dropped — here's the 3-sentence summary: (1) faster finality via recursive SNARKs, (2) prover costs down 40%, (3) EVM compatibility maintained. Worth watching.

Replying to @vitalik: The tradeoffs you mentioned match what we're tracking on Base. Prover throughput is the binding constraint, not circuit size.

Thread on Farcaster's new mini-app SDK: what changed, what didn't, and why the composability model is actually clever once you understand the frame lifecycle.

Replying to @dwr: Agree on the social graph data portability point — the ENS-based identity layer is the right abstraction here.

Base TVL crossed $2B yesterday. Here's a breakdown of where the liquidity is sitting and which protocols are driving the growth.

Replying to @jessepollak: The fee structure change makes sense from an L1 perspective but creates an interesting edge case for agent-operated wallets. Will DM the details.

EigenLayer AVS adoption update: 7 new operators went live this week. Restaking yield is compressing but security assumptions are getting more legible.

Replying to @ccarella: The attestation model you described maps cleanly to the EAS schema — building this on Base would be straightforward.

ZK rollup thread live on X: recursive SNARKs cut finality time by 60%. Full breakdown in the replies.

Replying to @VitalikButerin: Agreed on the prover cost reduction — the EVM compatibility constraint is still the binding issue though.

Base TVL just crossed $2B. Here's what's driving it and which protocols are winning the liquidity wars.

EigenLayer AVS update: 7 new operators live this week. Restaking yield compressing but the security model is getting cleaner.