We’re in a very strange moment for the internet. We all know it’s broken. That’s not news. But there’s something in the air—a vibe shift, a sense that things are about to change.

How to fix the internet

CWG-Internet is limited to Member States, with open consultation to all stakeholders. Previously, this group was established as the Dedicated Group as an integral part of WG WSIS, open only to all Member States, in accordance with Resolution 75 (WTSA ...

Council Working Group on International Internet-related Public Policy Issues (CWG-Internet)

The median price for Internet access in the United States is about $75 per month. Yikes! There must be less expensive options, right? Everyone knows you can downgrade your Internet service to pay ...

Best cheap Internet services in 2023

CBS Essentials is created independently of the CBS News editorial staff. We may receive commissions from some links to products on this page. Promotions are subject to availability and retailer terms.

Best TV and Internet bundles: Save money and get the services you want

These solution providers are focused on an assortment of opportunities in the IoT space, whether it’s protecting industrial systems from cyberattacks, integrating AI-powered surveillance systems ...

Internet of things

It can be hard to find “your people” when you’re autistic. For us spectrum jockeys—avoidant, overwhelmed, and overstimulated as we are—community can be as slippery as the spectrum itself ...

The Death of the Internet as a Haven for People With Autism

A line drawing of the Internet Archive headquarters building façade. An illustration of a magnifying glass. An illustration of a magnifying glass.

Spring, 1957 / McIninch Greenhouses.

Over two million people in the Gaza Strip face complete isolation from the world, with internet and power access shrinking as Israel continues to retaliate against Hamas atrocities. Gaza is ...

Gaza’s disappearing internet, visualized

Internet connectivity in Gaza’s Deir al Balah governorate has been most deeply impacted, according to NetBlocks. Overall connectivity in the region is currently at 38.9%.

What is the best internet provider in Harrisburg? The best internet provider in Harrisburg is Verizon Fios. The fiber internet provider offers fast, symmetrical download and upload speeds ...

Best Internet Providers in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania

Get the most recent info and news about SlashDB on HackerNoon, where 10k+ technologists publish stories for 4M+ monthly readers.

Avoid boiler-plate data access code, focus on features that matter Don’t Repeat Yourself – reuse data API in all solutions Low code - set up an API in hours, no

SlashDB

A Hitchhiker's Guide to Restaking and Its Risks

রিস্ট্যাকিং এবং এর ঝুঁকির জন্য হিচহাইকারস গাইড

Per Anhalter durch die Neuverpfändung und ihre Risiken

Una guía para autoestopistas sobre retomar y sus riesgos

Guide de l'auto-stoppeur sur le reprise et ses risques

एक सहयात्री की रीस्टेकिंग और उसके जोखिमों के बारे में मार्गदर्शिका

再ステーキングとそのリスクに関するヒッチハイカーガイド

재예약과 그 위험에 대한 히치하이커를 위한 가이드

Um guia do mochileiro para reestabelecer e seus riscos

Путешественник автостопом по пересдаче и ее рискам

Bir Otostopçunun Yeniden Seks Yapma Rehberi ve Riskleri

Hướng dẫn cho người quá giang về việc đặt lại và rủi ro của nó

搭便车者指南：重新抵押及其风险

Introduction There are different ways to form an investment thesis in crypto. One is to reject the importance of fundamentals and subscribe to the view that token prices are driven mainly by quick-gain-100x-seeking behavior or "financial nihilism." Is all crypto simply a meme? Should your technically sophisticated, tier-1 VC-backed, and community-vetted utility/governance "meme" coin be valued more than mine? Which narrative will be picked up by the KOLs next and pumped up by the crowd? What are we aping into? These views and strategies have merit but don't work at scale and across market cycles. Disciplined investors and researchers must carefully examine the facts and start seeing the forest for the trees. Let's stick to the first principles and dive into the concept of re-staking. Is it another backed by token emission or a new sustainable economy? As the saying goes, the proof is in the pudding; let's look for it! yield-generating bubble Cosmos Interchain Security Eigen Layer has popularised the idea of restaking (renting ETH economic security); however, it was initially proposed and implemented within the Cosmos ecosystem (renting ATOM economic security). Chains started with the Cosmos SDK provide configurability and sovereignty. However, developers' main challenge is building their own operator set (100-150 validators based on Tendermint consensus), bootstrapping liquidity, and using a native token, which has the risk of inflation and security value loss. enables other Chains (Consumer Chains) to be secured by the Cosmos Hub's validator set and the ATOM token's total market cap. In other words, it allows Consumer Chains to rent the economic security from Cosmos Hub. Cosmos Interchain security With 248MM ATOM staked, Cosmos Hub provides 3.2Bn$ in Economic Security to Consumer Chains. This first version of CIS is called “Replicated Security.” We Can Identify the Within the CIS Model: Following Stakeholders Validators – Run Cosmos Hub nodes and additional nodes for Consumer Chains Stakers – Delegate Atom tokens to Validators Consumer Chains – Rent Security from Cosmos Hub In Q3 2023, Chorus One the actual economic data from the two Consumer Chains on Cosmos – Stride and Neutron and made the following findings: reviewed Cosmos Hub Rewards: Cosmos Hub minted 367M$ per year or 1M$ daily in ATOM tokens as rewards for Stakers. Out of which 37M$ per year went to Hub Validators. Revenue: Cosmos Hub generated 1.5k$ per day in revenue from transaction fees. Stride generated 1k$ per day, and Neutron 12$ per day for Cosmos Hub. Combined daily transaction fees (2.5k$) would need to be 400 times higher to offset daily ATOM token emission (1M$) Infrastructure Costs (Excluding DevOps Costs) It's important to note that Validators need to set up additional nodes to support Consumer Chains, i.e., the hardware cost scales linearly with the addition of new Consumer Chains: The monthly node cost per Cosmos chain or ICS is 600$ per month or 7.2k$ per year. Cosmos Hub Security infra cost – 180 validators x 7.2k$ = 1.3M$ per year. Single Consumer Chain infra cost is the same – 1.3M$ per year. With Stride generating 365k$ per year and 36.5k$ in commission going to validators, such revenue doesn't come close to offsetting the infra costs for validators (1.3M$ per year). 40% of Cosmos Hub validators are not profitable, and this percentage increases as more Consumer Chains are onboarded. The consumer Chain would need substantially more revenue to provide an to Atom stakers. For example, to generate an extra 2% APR on staked ATOM, ICS would need to distribute $65MM per year to the Cosmos Hub. additional yield Finally, the ICS model removes the utility from the Consumer Chain native token, as it can only be used as a governance token and cannot be used for staking or network operations. , while the original idea of Cosmos Interchain Security offered easier onboarding of new chains, it came with a trade-off of increased infrastructure costs, lack of utility for the Consumer Chain native tokens, slashing risk for Validators, and high cost of economic security and therefore high revenue requirements for Consumer Chains. In summary As a result, Cosmos Hub governance is unlikely to approve more projects to join CIS unless they are set to deliver meaningful revenue to Hub validators and stakers. Moreover, the Replicated Security model is being revised, and it’s proposed to use a more flexible version called “ ,” whereby Validators can decide whether to run the nodes for Consumer Chains and Consumer chains would use only the Economic Security of supporting validators. Partial Set Security Eigen Layer Like CIS, allows Ethereum node operators to opt in to validate the new software modules. Eigen Layer calls these "chains" – Actively Validated Services. Eigen Layer The key difference with the CIS model is that the operators' cost of AVS support is marginal compared to running the ETH node; adding the AVS node to the existing ETH node doesn’t increase server load. Therefore, AVSs only need to generate enough fees to provide additional yield on top of native ETH staking yield. There Are the Within the Eigen Layer Model: Following Stakeholders Operators – Run Ethereum Nodes and additional AVS modules Restakers – Delegate Eth to Operators, which in turn opt into AVSs AVSs – Rent Security from Ethereum Infrastructure Costs (Excluding DevOps Costs): It costs approximately 1k USD per year to run 1 x ETH node (32 ETH), and more ETH validator slots can be added without significantly increasing the server load. The additional cost of supporting AVS is marginal (close to zero) Eigen Layer Economic Security As seen in the CIS model, Consumer Chains need to rent the entire $3.2Bn$ of economic security from Cosmos Hub and are constrained by the number of Cosmos Hub Validators. Eigen Layer implements "elastic scaling of security" and allows AVSs to dynamically control payouts to ETH stakers. 25000 AVS nodes can provide the equivalent of Cosmos Hub 3.2bn$ economic security. Similar to CIS, it would cost 64MM$ annually for AVS to generate an extra 2% APR on staked ETH. However, the key difference is that AVS can start with a smaller operator set and run more sustainable economics. Therefore, while the Eigen Layer brings additional infra costs almost to zero, it introduces the complexity of dynamic operator set and operator payout management. Watchtower networks will play an instrumental role in this process. Other Have Been Currently Worked Out: Open Questions and Challenges AVS Selection Process Who will choose AVSs? Will it be Operators or users of restaking protocols through governance voting? Or both? Operators are motivated to implement internal risk control frameworks to choose more profitable AVSs and manage slashing risks. Restaking protocols aim to conduct similar due diligence on behalf of their users. How will these two groups match AVS strategies and dynamically support the on and off-boarding of AVSs in an automated way? Are there any potential compliance issues with Stakers or Operators supporting AVSs in certain jurisdictions? These are not trivial questions! Potential Operator Centralization As the incremental cost to support new AVSs for operators is marginal – it would be more profitable for operators to support all available AVSs (as long as slashing risk is adequate), leading to centralization. Similarly, if users choose to restake only with the major operators, it will also lead to centralization. Eigen Layer is developing incentives to promote diverse operator sets and solo staking for AVSs to resolve this. Slashing risk Stakers opt-in by granting the Eigen Layer smart contracts the ability to impose additional slashing conditions on their staked ETH. The core idea of the Eigen Layer is to use "pooled security," whereby the same staked ETH is used to support multiple AVSs simultaneously. However, if one of the AVSs has a bug that leads to slashing, it can affect the operations of other AVSs. Eigen Layer addresses this risk by ensuring the system has " "  and a veto committee can reverse the slashing resulting from non-malicious behaviors. training wheels In addition, AVSs can acquire "attributable security," which, unlike pooled security, is specific to each AVS and will only be slashable by one AVS. Business Model Eigen Layer provides more flexibility for AVSs when defining the utility of their native token. In a mode, AVSs can use the native token for staking and network operations and balance its use vs. ETH throughout the project's lifetime. dual staking Conclusion In summary, the comparison between Cosmos Interchain Security (CIS) and Eigen Layer highlights the evolution of economic security concepts within blockchain ecosystems. While CIS pioneered the concept, it revealed drawbacks such as increased infrastructure costs, a lack of utility for native tokens, and high revenue requirements for Consumer Chains. Eigen Layer represents a substantial improvement by introducing elastic security scaling and dual staking. However, this enhanced flexibility comes with added complexity in managing slashing, security scaling, and operator payouts. It's truly fascinating to observe the ongoing evolution of this space as the latest restaking ideas from Eigen Layer permeate into other ecosystems such as Bitcoin ( ), Cosmos ( ), Solana ( ), and . Babylon Ethos Composable Avalanche Thank you to for your valuable feedback and review. Kam Benbrik

Restaking Explored: The Pursuit of a Sustainable Crypto-Economic Model

In this interview I am speaking with Fisher Yu, the co-founder and CTO of Babylon. We will discuss combining Bitcoin's security features with Proof-of-Stake networks, the challenges faced during the development of Babylon, and the exciting possibilities in this groundbreaking synergy. Please tell us your name and what you do My name is Fisher Yu. I am the co-founder and CTO of Babylon, a project aiming to scale Bitcoin and secure the decentralized world. Can you provide an overview of your background and experience in blockchain security and cryptography? What projects or research have you been involved in? I did my Ph.D. at Australian National University, focusing on network information theory. In my last year of Ph.D., I invented a decentralized media delivery platform and sold it to Dolby Laboratories. I then joined the University of Southern California as a Postdoc to study the security of decentralized systems systematically. During my Postdoc, I invented Polyshard and Coded Merkle Tree with my colleagues, among the most cited works in the blockchain scalability and data availability areas. I then joined Dolby Laboratories to lead the production of decentralized multimedia delivery networks. In the meantime, I have been collaborating with Professor David Tse on academic research and industry consulting. I have helped a few high-profile blockchain projects upgrade existing chains and launch new ones. A recent research paper from me, Professor Tse, and our co-authors, which was recently accepted by the world's most respected security conference, the 2023 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy Summit, entitled "Bitcoin-Enhanced Proof-of-Stake Security: Possibilities and Impossibilities," forms the foundation of Babylon. Why did you find Babylon? I've witnessed firsthand how information infrastructure is often concentrated in the hands of a select few entities. This concentration raises concerns about centralization and the potential for censorship and manipulation in our digital world. Our current systems are not as transparent, fair, or democratic as they should be. I recognized the potential of blockchain technology and saw an opportunity to disrupt this status quo. Blockchains can bring about decentralization, creating new social structures that prioritize transparency, fairness, and democracy. They can empower individuals and foster innovation, crucial for building a more equitable and inclusive digital landscape. Babylon, in particular, is my response to the challenge of scaling Bitcoin to ensure a more secure and decentralized world. It's a way to leverage the power of Bitcoin's security while expanding its utility in a broader ecosystem. By doing so, I hope to contribute to the ongoing transformation of our digital world into one that better aligns with the values of transparency, fairness, democracy, and individual empowerment. How exactly does Babylon work? It operates through a suite of Bitcoin security-sharing protocols, each leveraging distinct security features inherent to Bitcoin. These features encompass Bitcoin's Proof-of-Work (PoW) power, the Bitcoin asset itself, and its reputation as one of the most censorship-resistant global blockchains. Our current primary focus is on the Bitcoin Staking protocol. This protocol is designed to leverage unused Bitcoins to improve the economic security of Proof-of-Stake (PoS) systems. What makes it particularly noteworthy is its ability to allow Bitcoin holders to stake their bitcoins directly on the Bitcoin network in a trustless manner, eliminating the need for third-party custody, bridging, or wrapping services. Interestingly, the staked bitcoins can be effectively utilized as a staking asset within PoS systems. This functionality has various essential properties, including generating yields and being slashable, delegatable, and easily unstaked. Achieving this is made possible through advanced cryptographic technologies and by fully using Bitcoin's existing scripting language, all without requiring any modifications or forks to the Bitcoin network itself. What problem did you aim to solve with Babylon? The primary problem we set out to tackle is the security challenges that PoS blockchains face. While PoS systems have emerged as a promising alternative to address the energy consumption concerns associated with Bitcoin's PoW mechanism, they come with their issues. One of the most critical issues is the vulnerability to non-slashable long-range safety attacks. These attacks pose a large risk to the integrity and security of PoS chains, and addressing them is a complex problem. Another challenge is the limited staking capital available for security, especially for smaller PoS chains, which can hinder their ability to withstand attacks and provide a high level of security. Additionally, PoS systems can struggle with low liveness resilience, meaning they may face challenges in maintaining consistent and reliable network operations. However, we firmly believe that integrating Bitcoin can effectively resolve these problems. By leveraging the security features and robustness of the Bitcoin network, we aim to create security-sharing protocols that bring together the strengths of PoS systems and Bitcoin, essentially achieving the best of both worlds. In doing so, we hope to enhance the security and resilience of PoS blockchains while addressing their limitations, ultimately contributing to a more secure and sustainable blockchain ecosystem. What were your biggest challenges when building Babylon? One of the most significant challenges we encountered was navigating the limitations of Bitcoin's scripting language. Bitcoin's scripting language is intentionally limited in its expressiveness, making it quite basic and restrictive compared to more sophisticated smart contract languages used on other blockchain platforms. This limitation means it's exceedingly challenging to program complex functions or have the Bitcoin network understand off-chain events, which is crucial for our security-sharing protocols. In contrast to languages like Solidity, which enables developers to program a wide range of functions in smart contracts, working with Bitcoin's scripting language requires a different level of creativity and problem-solving. It demands a deep understanding of multiple disciplines, including cryptography and economics, and the ability to provide rigorous scientific proofs to ensure the security and effectiveness of our protocols. All these elements must seamlessly come together to design protocols to extract Bitcoin's security and share it with other decentralized systems. Overcoming the limitations of Bitcoin's scripting language has been a multifaceted challenge that has required a unique blend of skills, innovative thinking, and a commitment to the principles of security and decentralization. It's a testament to the complexity and intricacy of the blockchain space and the dedication required to address its unique challenges. What are the main advantages of utilizing Bitcoin's security model for proof-of-stake chains compared to traditional proof-of-work mechanisms? One of the main advantages of utilizing Bitcoin's security model for proof-of-stake chains compared to traditional proof-of-work mechanisms is the efficiency factor. PoS has already been demonstrated to be a more energy-efficient consensus mechanism than PoW. We're in an era where the environmental impact of cryptocurrencies is a pressing concern, and PoS has a significant edge in this regard. The reduced energy consumption associated with PoS makes it more sustainable and contributes to lower transaction processing times, another clear benefit. However, it's important to acknowledge that PoS has its own security challenges that must be addressed. These issues can't always be solved internally within the PoS system itself. This is where Bitcoin, the largest and most secure blockchain globally, comes into play. Bitcoin has a proven track record of robust security and attack resistance, making it a valuable resource for PoS chains needing external support. Combining the strengths of PoS and Bitcoin's security model can lead to a more secure and decentralized blockchain ecosystem. It's a natural progression in the evolution of blockchain technology. By leveraging Bitcoin's security, PoS chains can enhance their overall security posture and gain the trust of users and investors. This symbiotic relationship between PoS and Bitcoin can potentially contribute greatly to creating a better-decentralized world where security and efficiency coexist harmoniously. What potential risks or challenges can arise when implementing Bitcoin's security in a proof-of-stake environment, and how can they be mitigated? There are some potential risks and challenges when implementing Bitcoin's security in a proof-of-stake environment. One of the primary challenges is achieving and maintaining synchronicity between the PoS chains and the Bitcoin network. Both systems must work seamlessly together to ensure the security and integrity of transactions. Any discrepancies in timing or data between the two could lead to vulnerabilities. Another significant concern is the risk of double-spending in a PoS environment, where participants have a stake in the network. Unlike PoW, where miners invest computational power, PoS relies on participants' ownership of tokens. If there's a flaw in the integration that allows for double-spending, it could undermine the entire system's trustworthiness. Additionally, managing stake withdrawal delays can be a challenge. In PoS, participants often need to lock up their tokens as collateral, and there can be time delays before they can withdraw their stake. This introduces a potential friction point for users wanting to exit the system quickly. To mitigate these challenges, it's crucial to implement robust cryptographic measures and mechanisms for secure communication and data transfer between the PoS chains and the Bitcoin network. Time-locking and advanced Bitcoin timestamping can also be valuable tools to ensure that transactions and data are properly synchronized and secure. Furthermore, continuous monitoring and auditing of the integration are essential steps to identify and address potential vulnerabilities promptly. Regular security assessments and stress tests can help uncover weaknesses and ensure the implementation remains resilient against attacks. Are any specific technical considerations or modifications needed to make Bitcoin's security compatible with proof-of-stake chains? When it comes to making Bitcoin's security compatible with PoS chains, it's interesting to note that no modifications are required for the Bitcoin network. The innovation here lies in developing a Bitcoin staking protocol, which transforms Bitcoin into a staking asset that can be slashed, withdrawn, and delegated for use on PoS chains. The key lies in the PoS chains themselves, which need to incorporate specific logic to accept Bitcoin staking. This can typically be achieved by implementing smart contracts, a feature most PoS chains support. Using smart contracts ensures that the integration process is relatively non-intrusive, allowing PoS chains to harness Bitcoin's security while maintaining their functionality and rules. So, in essence, the technical considerations and modifications primarily revolve around the PoS chains, which must be designed to accept and interact with Bitcoin as a staking asset. This approach minimizes the need for changes to the Bitcoin network, ensuring compatibility with a range of PoS chains efficiently and streamlined. What is your long-term vision for Babylon? In the long term, my vision is to foster coexistence between Bitcoin and PoS chains in the decentralized landscape. The ultimate goal is to bridge these two blockchain technologies by using Bitcoin as a security backbone for PoS networks. The main idea behind this vision is to create an integrated, secure, and decentralized economy. We believe that by achieving this, we can not only retain the value of Bitcoin but also provide opportunities for Bitcoin holders to earn meaningful yields. This, in turn, could promote broader adoption of Bitcoin and PoS chains, leading to a more interconnected financial system. In this future scenario, the focus lies on enabling trust and interoperability between these blockchain ecosystems. The aim is to contribute to the evolution of the cryptocurrency landscape, gradually disrupting traditional finance and other sectors with more equitable and inclusive systems. The commitment here is to continue developing innovative solutions that support the overarching vision, strongly emphasizing security, scalability, and sustainability. The main goal is to empower individuals and institutions to actively participate in this evolving decentralized economy, unlocking new possibilities and reshaping the financial landscape. The long-term vision centers around realizing a more secure, efficient, and accessible global financial ecosystem driven by the synergy between Bitcoin and PoS chains. What are the most critical factors determining the success and adoption of Bitcoin to secure proof-of-stake chains in the blockchain industry? Several critical factors come to mind when determining the success and adoption of using Bitcoin to secure proof-of-stake (PoS) chains in the blockchain industry. First and foremost, it's the establishment and widespread adoption of Bitcoin security sharing protocols, particularly the Bitcoin Staking protocol. These protocols create a marketplace where Bitcoin holders become security suppliers while PoS chains and other decentralized infrastructures become consumers. The effectiveness of these protocols in facilitating this exchange of security plays a pivotal role in the success of this integration. However, one significant challenge is that the Bitcoin and PoS ecosystems are somewhat foreign to each other. This highlights the importance of market education. To bring these two worlds together successfully, there needs to be a joint effort to educate both Bitcoin holders and PoS enthusiasts about the benefits and intricacies of this security-sharing model. This education is critical to building trust and fostering cooperation between the two communities. Moreover, a solid economic model is essential for this shared security market's long-term sustainability and prosperity. Ensuring that the incentives are well-aligned for Bitcoin holders and PoS chains is crucial. This means establishing clear and fair compensation mechanisms that encourage participation in securing PoS chains while providing appropriate rewards to Bitcoin holders. Additionally, a strong and engaged community is vital. Communities play a significant role in blockchain, and their support can make or break a project. In the context of Bitcoin securing PoS chains, having an active and enthusiastic community that believes in the value of this integration can help drive adoption and ensure its continued success. What are the most exciting possibilities and innovations that can emerge from the synergy between Bitcoin and proof-of-stake chains in the coming years? One of the most intriguing prospects is unlocking the 21 million Bitcoins for the PoS economy. This could have a transformative effect, activating a massive pool of capital and creating a strong alignment between Bitcoin and the PoS world. Thinking about how this capital injection could fuel new developments and opportunities is exciting. One area where we can anticipate significant innovation is in security infrastructure. Bitcoin's robust security track record can provide a solid foundation for PoS chains, enhancing their overall security posture. This, in turn, could pave the way for more confidence in blockchain technology and potentially attract new participants and investors to the ecosystem. DeFi is another realm where the synergy between Bitcoin and PoS chains can lead to exciting innovations. DeFi has been a major driving force in the blockchain space. With the added security and stability that Bitcoin can provide, we might see even more sophisticated and secure DeFi applications emerge. This could lead to improved financial services, better lending and borrowing options, and increased accessibility for users worldwide. Furthermore, the liquidity market is poised for innovation. With Bitcoin's participation in PoS security, we could witness the creation of more efficient and liquid markets. This could make it easier for users to move assets between chains and ecosystems, fostering greater interoperability and reducing friction in the blockchain space. Lastly, the synergy between Bitcoin and PoS chains might also catalyze the launch of more application-specific blockchains and infrastructure. Powered by Bitcoin's security, these chains could be tailored to specific industries or use cases, enabling more specialized and optimized solutions. This diversification could open up new possibilities across many sectors, from supply chain management to healthcare.

Revolutionizing Proof-of-Stake: Leveraging Bitcoin's Strengths 

Trusts are a major form of that enables collaborations, especially economic transactions, forming a cornerstone of human civilization. As billions of people are already connected to the Internet, physical limits to cooperation have been majorly removed. However, traditional interpersonal trust can not scale with the Internet. It struggles to expand beyond family ties, long-accumulated reputations, and personal relationships formed over time. Trust has become a bottleneck for human civilization in the Internet age. social capital For many years, blockchains have been dubbed “trust machines”. Yet, we haven’t explored what type of trust is produced by blockchain and what raw materials are used for its production. Some researchers stated that the product of blockchain is , a quite intuitive view: blockchain produces blockspace, while users of on-chain applications pay gas to consume them. Even though virtual machines make blockspace programmable, blockspace is always bound to a specific virtual machine and can only be utilized by applications within the same chain. IMO, blockspace is a standardized packaging of a more general product, similar to how bottled water is a standardized packaging of water. This more general product can be called decentralized trust. blockspace Compared with trust, decentralized trust is more like belief. Belief is a meta form of trust, an endorsement of an abstract idea, and with appropriate guidance, can be transformed into trust among people who hold the same beliefs, thus fostering cooperation. Perhaps one day, we will find a better name than decentralized trust. Decentralized trust has many similarities with electricity: both are produced in the form of currency and have a wide range of uses, yet are difficult to store. The relationship between blockspace and decentralized trust is like direct current (DC) and electricity. DC is an easily usable form of electricity, and many consumer-grade appliances are driven by it. Speaking of the analogy between decentralized trust and electricity, let’s revisit the early history of electricity. Just a few years after the invention of electric light, the great Thomas Edison built the first DC power station on Pearl Street in the southeastern corner of Manhattan. Because of DC’s limited transmission distance, the power station could only serve customers within a radius of less than a mile. For users, the service they used was not electricity, but lighting, the only use case of electricity at the time. The rest of the story is well-known to almost anyone in the tech industry, Nikola Tesla, nobody at the time, invented the AC generator. AC could be transmitted over long distances. Besides lighting up bulbs, AC could also efficiently drive electric motors, thus opening up unlimited possibilities for the application of electricity. Because of these advantages, AC gradually became the main form of electricity and propelled human society into the electrical era. Today, electricity is ubiquitous in our lives. The advent of made decentralized trust arrive at its AC moment. Just as AC ushered in the age of electricity, restaking will drive human society into the era of decentralized trust. restaking If you are not yet familiar with restaking, you risk missing out on the most significant innovation in the Web3 field. Please familiarize yourself with restaking through the articles and interviews by , inventor of the restaking concept and the founder of , before continuing with this text.) Sreeram Kannan Eigenlayer Why restaking is so important for decentralized trust? Firstly, through restaking, decentralized trust can be easily transmitted over the boundaries of consensus protocols. It’s worth noting that the sharing of decentralized trust is not an invention from restaking but an exploration result of shared security. As we all know, scalability has been the core technical theme in the blockchain field in recent years. A very direct approach to scalability is the multi-chain network, which distributes applications to run on dedicated blockchains, aka appchains, thereby bypassing the capacity limit of a single chain. Meanwhile, multiple chains are connected to a network through cross-chain protocols, allowing for the exchange of assets and data between applications. However, security would linearly decrease if a single chain is simply divided into multiple chains. Therefore, researchers of multi-chain networks have been for years exploring shared security: sharing a single big source of decentralized trust between multiple blockchains. The first multi-chain network which proposed and realized shared security was . With the Polkadot relay chain at its core, shared security is achieved by dispatching relay chain validator groups to appchains (parachains in Polkadot terms). Parachains must use a unified virtual machine: Substrate runtime to take advantage of shared security. Parachains generate blocks individually, which are then finalized by the relay chain together with blocks from other parachains. As you can see, Polkadot has achieved shared security among blockchains under a unified consensus protocol. Polkadot Currently, is launching its first replicated security consumer chain: . Replicated security is the first version of shared security that the Cosmos community has long explored. All provider chain validators become validators of the consumer chain and run nodes of the consumer chain. Updates on the validator set are synchronized from the provider chain to the consumer chain via . Validators receive incentives from the consumer chain. If validators of the consumer chain behave maliciously (e.g., double-signs a block), proof of their malfeasance will be submitted to the provider chain through IBC, which invokes slashing on their staked assets on the provider chain. A major advancement of Cosmos shared security is that it transcends the boundaries of consensus protocols; that is to say, provider chains and consumer chains have independent consensus protocols. Cosmos Neutron the Inter-Blockchain Communication (IBC) protocol Though is not well-known as Polkadot and Cosmos, it is also one of the pioneers in exploring shared security. The core of Octopus Network is Octopus Relay which is not a chain itself but a set of smart contracts on the NEAR blockchain. All PoS operations of Octopus appchains take place on Octopus Relay, then are synchronized to the appchains via cross-chain messages. Meanwhile, all rewards and penalties of appchains are gathered to Octopus Relay and then executed on the NEAR blockchain. Since the mainnet launch in October 2021, Octopus has already achieved shared security, crossing the boundaries of consensus protocols. Octopus Network Although sharing security between blockchains existed before restaking, restaking greatly extends shared security supply, turning PoS public chains into huge security pools or decentralized trust dynamos. Based on current staking rates and the price of Ether, Ethereum can provide $35 billion worth of decentralized trust, akin to connecting the Niagara Falls hydropower station to the electricity grid. Inspired by Eigenlayer, Octopus Network has decided to use for its appchains, thereby greatly expanding the supply in its shared security market. $NEAR restaking to replace $OCT Staking as the security source More importantly, restaking can empower any system by decentralized trust, not limited to blockchains. For example, optimistic verified cross-chain bridges wait a challenging period before using the root of trust (usually block headers) to verify cross-chain messages. To prevent potential DoS plus block stuffing attacks, the challenge period usually lasts several hours or even several days, significantly increasing cross-chain transaction latency. If there is a group of witnesses based on restaking providing signed endorsements for the root of trust, they can be put into use whenever the economic value of accumulated endorsements(slashable asset) exceeds the economic value of the cross-chain transactions. By introducing restaking-based witnesses, cross-chain transaction delay can be decreased from several hours or days to a few seconds. Compared with blockspace, restaking is a universal form of decentralized trust, which open up unlimited possibilities for decentralized trust. Internet platforms sit at the centerpiece of Web 2.0 to facilitate collaboration. In Web 3.0, decentralized trust-driven cryptonetworks will replace centralized platforms. Providing the cryptonetwork is backed by enough decentralized trust, collaborators don’t need to trust each other or the operators of the cryptonetwork. When collaboration is successfully completed, the cryptonetwork captures a small portion of the economic surplus created by the collaboration and distributes it to its operators. Operators are providers of decentralized trust who participate in the operation of the cryptonetwork in a permissionless and voluntary way. They must follow the rules of the cryptonetwork; otherwise, severe economic penalties will be upon them. I believe that most internet-based economic collaborations can be achieved like this, breaking through the traditional trust bottleneck while avoiding control from centralized platforms. With the boost of restaking, decentralized trust will be everywhere! After discussing the output of trust machines, let’s look at the input. For Proof of Work blockchains, they produce decentralized trust by inputting computational power, aka chips + electricity, literally transforming into social capital. physical capital From the input and output perspective, Proof of Stake blockchains look strange. In most cases, the staking asset is both the input and output of the blockchain, so there should exist a self-reference. Take Ethereum as an example. As Ethereum carries more and more transactions and earns growing , the intrinsic value of Ether increases with its embedded cash flow( ). The rise in Ether price allows Ethereum to produce more decentralized trust, enhancing its ability to capture more protocol revenue. The economic cycle of Ethereum is self-referential, but every link in the cycle is based on logic and rational expectations. protocol revenue DCF The blockchain narrative is like others in human society: religions, nations, and currencies all originate from the common imagination of Homo sapiens. Yuval Noah Harari points out in his masterpiece “Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind” that common imagination is the very reason that Homo sapiens stood out in the evolutionary competition. As a rationalist, I am happy to see rational-based common imaginations gradually replacing irrational-based ones and playing an increasingly important role in the development of civilization. PoS blockchains seem like perpetual motion machines, capable of continuously producing social capital from thin air. But in the long run, the common imagination will inevitably collapse if PoS blockchains cannot effectively capture protocol revenue (please be noticed: staking income is not protocol revenue, but cost!). When the protocol revenue can’t support the valuation of the native assets, prices fall, and blockchain security decreases, further weakening the blockchain’s ability to capture value, a vicious cycle. Restaking will serve as a multiplier for Ethereum’s protocol revenue, helping Ether to internalize protocol revenue from hundreds if not thousands of decentralized systems besides the Ethereum blockchain. For other PoS blockchain communities, ignoring restaking equals ignoring the opportunity to step into a positive feedback loop, which is the only way to survive in public chain competition. By , Founder of Octopus Network. Louis Liu Also published . here

Restaking: the Only Way to Survive in Public Chain

Reafirmar: la única forma de sobrevivir en cadena pública

Reprise : le seul moyen de survivre dans la chaîne publique

आराम करना: सार्वजनिक श्रृंखला में जीवित रहने का एकमात्र तरीका

再ステーキング: パブリックチェーンで生き残る唯一の方法

Retomar: a única forma de sobreviver na cadeia pública

Đặt lại: Cách duy nhất để tồn tại trong chuỗi công khai

重质押：公链生存的唯一途径

Loneliness and the Biography of a Living Person

, a Software as a Service (SaaS) platform that creates, visualizes, and organizes codebase maps through AI, today announced its public launch out of 's venture-building program with pre-seed investment from . Devnaut High Alpha Innovation Capital One Ventures As codebases continue to grow in size and complexity, developers, engineers, and technology leaders are increasingly facing the difficult and time-consuming challenges of navigating unfamiliar, frequently-changing code. identify unclear ownership boundaries as their primary challenge at work, and nearly wish they spent less time tracking down colleagues to resolve application issues, according to a study published by Sentry in partnership with SlashData. those surveyed Sixty-two percent of three out of four Devnaut is addressing this challenge and revolutionizing the way developers interact with complex codebases through its proprietary, intuitive, AI-powered code cartographer. The code exploration and collaboration tool fosters increased productivity, team collaboration, and significant reductions in forensic work by helping developers, managers, and executives obtain real-time visibility. Using the , Devnaut's novel approach is enabling organizations to visualize and automatically organize code. C4 model "The industry has been building low-level code tools geared toward serving single pain points for developers for decades, but no one has solved for the macro-level perspective. By visualizing complex codebases, Devnaut is eliminating the burden of time-consuming manual forensic work and empowering developers to focus on what matters most: building great software," said Devnaut Co-Founder and CEO, Jeff White. "Devnaut's mission is to make code accessible and collaborative, and our code cartographer is the first step towards achieving that vision." White, a serial entrepreneur and experienced senior executive, leads Devnaut alongside veteran tech and engineering leader Bob Donald, Co-founder and CTO. Together, they bring over 55 years of experience building, leading, and growing SaaS technology startups. White, a five-time founder, previously founded Driven CRM, Pensmore Software, and Agility Payments, and has held executive positions at Rocket Matter and ClearSpend. Donald, a current Boston University Graduate Lecturer focused on artificial intelligence, brings a wealth of experience leading technology and engineering functions at SaaS organizations such as Zebra Technologies, SAS, and Monster. "There's a unique opportunity for innovation at the documentation layer, making granular, fragmented information systematically accessible. This facilitates developer onboarding and allows tenured engineers to use their time more productively," said Phil Kim, partner at Capital One Ventures. "To build, innovate and meet evolving requirements, engineers need context on how their technical systems are set up and Devnaut is addressing that intricate challenge." "At High Alpha Innovation, we are proud to co-create world-changing startups with top global corporations," said Elliott Parker, CEO of High Alpha Innovation. "Devnaut is addressing an industry-wide challenge that has the extraordinary potential to dramatically reshape the way technology teams and organizations operate." About Devnaut Devnaut is the world's first AI code cartographer redefining how technology teams interact with complex codebases. Through AI-powered visualization and organization, Devnaut minimizes the time spent on code forensics, enabling a seamless software development, navigation, and collaboration experience for developers, engineers, and technology leaders. Learn more about Devnaut at . www.devnaut.io

Devnaut Launches to Redefine Engagement With Complex Codebases

Devnaut se lanza para redefinir el compromiso con bases de código complejas

Lancement de Devnaut pour redéfinir l'engagement avec des bases de code complexes

डेवनॉट ने जटिल कोडबेस के साथ जुड़ाव को फिर से परिभाषित करने की शुरुआत की

Devnaut が複雑なコードベースとの関わりを再定義するために開始

Devnaut é lançado para redefinir o envolvimento com bases de código complexas

Devnaut ra mắt để xác định lại mức độ tương tác với các cơ sở mã phức tạp

Devnaut 推出重新定义复杂代码库的参与

Last week, The Foundation released the , authored by SlashData, which examines DevOps and Continuous Delivery adoption, practices, and team performance. One of the many interesting sections in this year's report looked at DevOps-related technologies. Continuous Delivery 2023 State of CD report Inspired by this insight, we take a deep dive into how to build high-performance DevOps toolchains. DevOps tools and toolchains DevOps isn't just about tools. There are several other critical elements for high-performance software delivery: Transformational leadership Lean product management Technical practices Organizational culture Even your change approval process impacts your performance and, ultimately, your success as an organization. Despite being about than tools, your DevOps toolchain remains crucial. more You create a cohesive DevOps toolchain by selecting great tools and arranging them well. You can deploy frequently and reliably with a high degree of confidence. If you get it wrong, the tools get in the way and slow you down. A set of DevOps tools becomes a when it covers the whole pipeline: toolchain Continuous Delivery Work item management Source control Build and test automation Security testing Artifact repositories Infrastructure as Code and configuration management Deployment automation Monitoring and observability Incident management You're spoiled for choice when you look at DevOps tools. A great toolchain is a union of solid tools and a simple integration design. Some tools, or combinations of tools, will make your life more difficult. DevOps tool research The 2023 State of CD report looked at tools in depth. The researchers looked at the impact of tools and technologies on: Lead time for changes Deployment frequency Time to restore service The report found that high performers use more tools than low performers. Almost 45% of low performers used a single tool and deployed less frequently than once a month. High performers were 2x more likely to be using 10+ tools than a single tool. Teams were significantly less likely to be low performers if they used CI/CD tools to automate builds and deployments. To achieve similar results, you need to assemble the correct tools in the right way. Teams who self-hosted multiple CI/CD tools tended to be lower performers. Interoperability issues and manual handling are common causes of deployment pipeline slowdowns. High-performance DevOps toolchains There are 4 steps to building high-performance DevOps toolchains: Select best-in-class tools Prefer managed solutions Keep workloads clean Limit tool dependencies Select best-in-class tools For the critical elements of your toolchain, you need best-in-class tools. In particular, you need the best tools you can get for your build server, deployment automation, and monitoring. Specialized tools are carefully designed to simplify complex workloads. It's often to run workloads on a general-purpose platform. You may save some money by adding workloads to an existing tool. But, you tend to pay in other ways, such as longer lead times and lower deployment frequency. possible Low performance in software delivery can be more expensive than licenses for tools. Prefer managed solutions You need to limit the number of tools you self-host. Hosting a complete toolchain is no small endeavor. You shouldn't take lightly the work involved in keeping it updated, stable, and responsive. You can use managed services to reduce the operational burden of your tools. Only self-host where you have a strong reason to do so. Keep workloads clean Don't clutter a workload with too many tools. It will slow you down if you need to cobble together several tools to perform one workload, such as building a software version. Subtle issues will routinely crop up that you must fix, which moves your focus away from delivering valuable software. Limit tool dependencies Keep the dependencies between tools minimal and simple. You don't want to investigate interoperability issues as it stops you from doing more valuable work. Control should flow along the pipeline, with tools only being aware of tools that precede or follow them. For example, consider this common Continuous Delivery pipeline: Version control (Git) Build server (Jenkins) Artifact repository (Octopus) Deployment automation (Octopus) Monitoring and alerting (DataDog) On-call and incident management (PagerDuty) You can replace Jenkins with a different build server if you ensure you push the output to your artifact repository in the same format. You don't impact the other tools, so this is a well-designed toolchain. If you had to update your deployment process or version control, it would suggest they're too tightly coupled to Jenkins. Conclusion A strong DevOps toolchain is a mix of great tools and sound design. Combining tools into a cohesive toolchain improves performance. However, poor tools, self-hosting overheads, and interoperability issues cause slowdowns. Keep in mind the 4 steps to a great toolchain: Select best-in-class tools Prefer managed solutions Keep workloads clean Limit tool dependencies Happy deployments! Also published here.

How to Build a High-Performance DevOps Toolchain 

Backend Development is also known as server-side development. It is everything that the users don’t see and contains behind-the-scenes activities that occur when performing any action on a website. It focuses primarily on databases, backend logic, APIs, and Servers.” The top backend development frameworks in 2022 are Node.js, Golang, PHP (Laravel, cakePHP), C# (ASP.NET), Java (Spring), Python (Django/Flask), and Ruby (Ruby on Rails). Why Use A Backend Framework? Separating your backend from your frontend is modern best practice when building web applications. 95% of the time the backend serves as a CRUD application with an API that allows you to send data to and from the frontend of your website. This makes your application more scalable as you can make edits to the backend or frontend without risking the functionality of the other. The frameworks that we will go through below are all built with security in mind. By using a modern backend development framework you have the power of the communities working to ensure that your backend is secure and safe from modern threats. Major companies, banks, and institutions rely on these frameworks including Netflix, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and most major companies. You can think of frameworks like building blocks that are already put together for you. They allow you to benefit from the knowledge and progress of others without needing to write everything yourself. In frameworks like Laravel things like login and user management are already built into the codebase from the start. This way your development team doesn’t need to waste time reinventing the wheel. The Top Backend Frameworks in 2022 Node.js Is The Clear Cut #1 Backend Node.js stands out as the best backend framework. It is used by the most modern and cutting edge companies to develop web applications. The list includes Netflix, NASA, Trello, PayPal, LinkedIn, Uber, Twitter, GoDaddy, and more. You simply can’t argue with a list like that. Node.js also allows web developers to build their entire application in JavaScript, making fullstack engineering teams easier than ever. For many year JavaScript was seen as a web framework that could only run with a JavaScript engine in the browser. Chrome helped change that with the opensource v8 JavaScript engine. This allowed the creator of Node.js, Ryan Dahl, to build the Node.js runtime for server side execution of JavaScript. Essentially making it so the backend of the application also had a JavaScript engine in order to execute JavaScript. Ultimately most technologies come down to their efficiency at a use case and the level of support in the community to innovate and move it forward. Node.js has both of these. Node.js is built to be able to handle a large amount of simultaneous interactions, perfect for the web. In fact PayPal saw a 35% reduction in average response time after switching to Node.js. It also boasts a massive and growing community with the most momentum out of any backend framework. Popular Node.js frameworks include Express.js, Adonis.js and others. These include different pre-built elements depending on the project you are working on. Golang – The Top Backend Choice For Heavy Computation Golang is an awesome programming language that was made specifically with performance in mind. Developed by Google in 2007, Go was made similar to C to make it as efficient as possible when dealing with high-performing concurrent services. It is also useful for many different purposes like Python making it a powerful all around language as well as a backend technology. Go also boasts a load of top companies using it including Google, Dropbox, Riot Games, Twitch, and others. Top companies like Netflix and Uber use both Golang and Node.js. This is because with modern web applications you can write different microservices in different languages, allowing you to use the best performing technology for each specific service needed. Maybe streaming video uses one language, while facial recognition uses another technology. Ultimately, if you are building something big that will be data intensive and complex Golang could be the right backend technology for you. Go is a more specialized language and therefore for the average project it can be more complex than other alternatives. Python – Django & Flask Python is one of the most popular programming languages in the world. These days it is often one of the first programming languages people learn in computer science. With this community comes the support of two excellent backend frameworks Django and Flask. As always with Python one of the main reasons it is a popular backend framework is due to the simplicity of the code. Python is almost like readying written text compared to other more complex languages. Python also boasts some of the best frameworks for machine learning and data science including Keras, Pandas, Tensorflow, and others. This means that if you want to build a data intensive application then you only need to have Python developers to build the whole backend. C# – ASP.NET ASP.NET written in C# is one of the most popular backend frameworks. As with all things Microsoft it comes with excellent support and a strong community moving the technology forward. Companies using ASP.NET include Slack, Alibaba Travels, Grubhub, CNN, and HBO. C# is a programming language that has been perfected and supported over the years, making it one of the most powerful technologies for building large enterprise applications. You will have a world of documentation at your fingertips, great plugins for VSCode, unit testing ready to roll, and every other feature you could ever need laid out for you. You will also benefit from the support of Microsoft if you ever need it. Building a backend in C# with ASP.NET is not the most modern technology, but it is a robust and powerful framework that would make any technology nerd impressed. PHP – Laravel & CakePHP Come Ready To Deploy With PHP you have several popular backend frameworks. We will focus on the most popular Laravel and CakePHP. With these frameworks you get you backend API ready to send routes in almost no-time. For beginners and smaller projects these technologies are excellent as they are some of the fastest to build in. The web itself is built on PHP which has been around since 1994. This means that PHP is very well documented and has a massive community of developers. However, with an older language like PHP you miss out on all the innovation that comes with newer technologies. Luckily in frameworks like Laravel you are working mostly with their documentation that keeps you out of the weeds of regular PHP development. This speeds things up and allows keeps it simple. Unless you have an existing skillset in PHP (Laravel or CakePHP) we would recommend you build with a newer technology like Node.js. However depending on your development team’s skillset PHP can make a lot of sense. We use Laravel ourselves for some services at slashdev.io and have loved it. Java – Spring Java is the most used programming language in the world followed by Node.js, TypeScript, and C#. It has been around for years and boasts a massive community. It would be considered the oldest and most bulky of the technologies on this list and to be honest we almost never see anything new being built in Java. large companies use Java and have been building with it for years. The support is strong and you can build anything with it. However, for most there are better options (Node.js). Ruby – Ruby on Rails Ruby and it’s backend web framework Rails were on top of the world for a few years. Rails was released in 2005 and was a hot new framework for companies building web applications. Ruby was made to be easy to learn and has clear syntax. This makes it similar to Python and easy for developers to pickup. In recent years Ruby on Rails has fallen off with most companies. It has a very small pool of developers making finding talent harder than other languages. It also has been eclipsed by technologies like Node.js and Golang as the most performant new frameworks around. Ruby on Rails is a strong framework and it makes this list for a reason. However if you are looking to build a team around it we have found it to be one the hardest skills on the market to find. Along with this it has lost momentum to other frameworks on the market. Your Job As CEO/CTO Is To Make The Right Call Ultimately, only you understand the inputs and needs for your project. It is your job to consider speed vs. support, hiring vs doing yourself etc. We hope that this helps give you an idea of what we are seeing in our development community so that you can use this knowledge in your own pursuits. Also published . here

SLASHDB

slashdb.com

1-10 employees

Since 2012

COMPANY RANKING

SLASHDB

EVERGREEN INDEX #10096

Representing this company? Click here to claim and customize this page!

SlashDB WIKI

Apply to get your Tech Company News Page live on HackerNoon.com today!

SLASHDB

slashdb.com

1-10 employees

Since 2012

COMPANY RANKING

SLASHDB

EVERGREEN INDEX #10096

RELATED COMPANIESRANK

STORIES ABOUT SLASHDB

Representing this company? Click here to claim and customize this page!

SlashDB WIKI

Apply to get your Tech Company News Page live on HackerNoon.com today!