►
From YouTube: KZG-Ceremony Breakout Call #8
Description
A
And
I
guess
we
can
just
get
started
everyone's
here
and
we're
already
recording
the
agendas
in
the
chat.
It's
very
rough,
so
we'll
just
kind
of
jump
around
into
whatever
needs
to
be
talked
about.
First
I'll,
say:
apologies.
I've
been
a
little
preoccupied
these
last
two
weeks,
but
now
that
the
merge
is
done
most
of
the
projects
that
have
occupied
my
attention
are
done
so
I'll
be
back
full
force
on
this.
So
yeah.
Let's
do
quick
round
robin,
and
I
know
I've
been
at
least
like
keeping
up
with
the
chat.
A
B
Yes,
so
we're
calling
it
sequencer.
We
we
basically
combined
the
code
that
kev
produced
and
reproduced
in
a
repo
that
now
lives
under
slash
ethereum
kcg
ceremony,
dash
sequencer
and
we're
basically
working
on
that
one
and
finishing
it
up.
There's
not
a
whole
lot
left
to
do
all
the
major
parts
are
there.
B
I
guess
the
the
main
thing
to
be
done
is
a
couple
of
open,
open
design
discussions
or
questions
or
suggestions
around
the
design.
I
posted
some
of
them
in
the
issue
for
this
call.
A
Okay,
great
yeah
carl:
do
you
want
to
get
into
the
design
issues,
or
should
we
just
do
quick
updates
from
everybody?
First,
you
have
a
preference.
A
Okay,
yeah:
why
don't
we?
You
could
just
go
right
into
that
discussion
and
make
sure
to
leave
time
for
the
other
bits,
but
yeah
go
ahead,
I'm
cool!
If
you
want
to
start.
B
B
I
would
prefer
if
the
coordinator
doesn't
hold
any
private
key
material
and
operates
trustlessly,
and
there
are
a
couple
of
ways
we
can
do.
We
can
work
towards
that.
One
of
them
is
for
the
ethereum
address
authentication.
We
can
do
a
double
signature
approach
that
doesn't
involve
a
coordinated
key
for
github.
B
There
are
alternative
approaches
that
involve
challenge
response
and
having
the
user
post
some
item
under
their
account
somewhere
and
like
it's
common
to
like,
for
example,
we
could
open
an
issue
on
the
kcg
ceremony,
sequencer
repo
and
have
everyone
post
a
message
on
this
issue,
but
this
might
be
a
little
bit
like
too
bad
ux.
The
github
option
is
already
like
the
easy
way
in.
C
Yeah
I'd
worry
a
little
bit
about
the
that
getting
just
a
chaotic
thing
and
it's
very
centralized
then,
via
that
one
particular
thing,
I
think
maybe
github
gifts
or
better
ways
of
doing
it.
If
we
are
trying
to
post
things
for
users
yeah
despite
they're,
not
having
a
centralized
reference
for
all
of
that.
D
Also,
we
have
github.
Api
is
kind
of
bad
with
its
rate
limits.
So
if
you
are
not
using
per
authenticated
user
requests,
you
only
get
5000
requests
per
hour,
so
that
may
not
be
enough
on
launch
day
if
we
are
doing
what
we
are
doing
right
now,
which
is
every
user
authenticates
with
oh,
if
we
get
5000
requests
per
user
per
hour,
so
that's
going
to
be
more
than
enough.
B
The
reason
is
kev
on
the
call
yes,
so
yeah.
I
can
quickly
recap,
but
kev
explained
that
he
picked
the
particular
rsa,
because
it
was
the
most
widely
supported.
But
then
I
was
thinking.
Maybe
we
can
just
have.
The
coordinator
have
an
ethereum
private
key
and
just
use
an
e-sign
message
to
sign
these
messages,
because
that
might
be
a
more
ethereum
native
way
of
signing
messages.
C
E
Yeah,
I
think
I
spoke
with
remco
yeah.
I
don't
mind
this
either,
because
the
only
reason
I
chose
jw2
is
because
of
the
canonical
format.
Then
it's
just
why
the
available
libraries,
but
if
we're
assuming
ethereum,
then
you
sign,
should
probably
be
a
prerequisite.
E
F
A
B
A
C
F
C
I
mean
I
don't
think
the
sign
in
is
changing.
That's
the
same,
so
yes,
final
official
tm,
what's
been
in
the
repo
for
quite
a
while.
I
guess
the
the
the
change
here
is
just
well
basically
adding
we
can
verify
stuff
from
the
sequencer
so
that
we
can
sort
of.
You
can
point
to
things
if
the
sequencer
quote.
Unquote
lies!
C
Okay!
Thank
you!
So
it's
it's
it's
more
for
like
safety
after
the
fact
and
for
like
arguing
about
what
what
what
happened
here.
If,
if
you,
if
you
think
the
sequencer
cheated
you
or
is
trying
to
censor
you
in
certain
ways,
you
can
try
catch
that
or
they're
trying
to
trick
you
by
giving
you
bad
points.
That
kind
of
thing
we'll
then
have
proof
that
this
happened.
B
Cool
yeah.
That
was
actually
my
my
main
discussion
point
on
like
how
can
we
make
it
such
that
the
transcript
that
results
from
this
can
be
trustlessly
verified?
I
mean
the
actual
contributions
and
everything
that's
already
guaranteed
by
the
ceremony,
but
these
are
sort
of
extra
things
on
top,
so
you
can
verify
who.
G
B
The
contributions
by
linking
it
to
other
identities,
I'm
not
sure,
like
what
is
the
process
for
finalization
here,
because
I
feel
like
we're
breaking
up
a
little
bit,
we're
breaking
up
a
little
bit
the
spec
that
was
already
in
a
more
or
less
final
form.
Do
we
want
to
revisit
more
things,
or
is
it
just
a
couple
of
last
minute
changes
or
like
how?
How
do
we
feel
about?
B
H
Used
a
lot,
so
I
think
the
current
queuing
implementation
diverged
quite
significantly
from
the
original
spec
there
is.
There
is
no
queueing
mechanism,
we
don't
care
about
the
ordering.
The
the
mechanism
that
is
implemented
right
now
is
is
much
simpler.
C
Yeah,
so
you
tried
to
up
well
you
try
to
merge
that
into
the
the
specs.
You
open
the
pr
for
that
number.
22
that
you
closed.
H
So
there
should
be
another,
so
there
are
two
pr's
one
is
one
just
changes,
the
structure
of
specs,
so
it's
a
bit
easier
to
follow
that
one
doesn't
have
any
material
changes
and
then
there
is
another
another
pr
that
I
posted
on
telegram,
which
is
in
my
personal
repo,
because
I
don't
have
access
to
to
the
specs
repo,
and
I
wanted
to
separate
it
from
the
structure
and
what
it
does
like
with
this
other
pr,
let
me
find
the
link
does.
Is
it
describes
the
queueing
strategy?
G
H
C
Okay,
so
from
lobby
into
your
local
master
and
your
master
is
the
one
with
the
the
other
changes
that
you
have
open
in
pr21
on
the
main
specs
right,
yeah,
correct,
okay,
okay,
I
see
I
see
so.
Can
I
reopen
then
your
branch,
your
pr22,
because
then
that
should
just
be
on
top
of
this
other
one,
your
your
other
changes
you're
trying
to
make
restructuring
yeah
it.
It.
H
C
Okay,
sure
that
sounds
good.
The
the
only
reason
I
haven't
merged
22
is,
I
was
a
little
bit
confused
as
like
what
things
get
broken
out
into
the
api
spec
like
to
me.
The
transcript
schema,
for
example,
is
not
really
a
part
of
the
api.
C
Yeah
yeah
sure
schemas
or
something
like
I
just
sort
of
what's
api
and
what's
not
like
there's
under
the
sequencer,
the
sequencer
api
dot,
md.
H
C
H
The
the
only
thing
I
did
was
I
took
the
original
files.
The
I
haven't
really
changed
their
names.
I
I
followed
whatever
they
had
in
the
past
and
I
moved
them
to
a
separate
directories
to
categorize
by
function.
So
we
have
like
four
main
themes
here.
One
is
the
contribution
format,
the
other
one
is
con,
the
the
cryptographic
stuff
and
then
we
have
participant
and
sequencer
yeah,
and
then
I
haven't
really
renamed
any
of
the
original
files.
I
just
rearranged
them
so
that
they
go
to
the
folder
that
describes
that
concept.
C
Okay,
yeah,
I
guess
I'm
just
trying
to
point
out
that
I'm
a
little
like
I
just
found
a
little
confusing
as
to
what's
supposed
to
be
where
in
terms
of
apis
or
not,
but
look
I'm
not
gonna,
I'm
I'm,
I'm
not
gonna
bike
shed
those
I'm
pretty
happy
enough.
With
this.
C
I
think
in
the
name
of
good
enough
and
moving
forward,
let's
let's
start
there,
and
if
I
want
to
change
things
in
the
future,
I
can
open
another
pr
to
do.
That
sounds
good
awesome.
B
So
you
mentioned
there
were
changes
in
the
way
the
queue
works.
Could
you
like
yeah.
H
Or
your
lobby
branch
so
kevin
I
discussed,
and
the
current
idea
is
that
you
have
a
capped
lobby.
H
So
let's
say
you
could
you
can
accept
up
to
10
000
people
in
the
lobby
and
those
10
000
people
can
ping
sequencer
say
every
10
seconds
can
be,
of
course
configured
and
then,
whenever
a
new
spot
opens
up
whoever
pings
first
they
get
to
contribute
the
one
important
piece
is
we
don't
want
people
to
cheat,
so
we
don't
want
them
to
ping
them
to
ping
sequencer
too
often,
because
this
way
they
could
starve
other
users.
So
what
we
do
is
a
we
do
rate
limiting
and
we
expect
them
to
ping.
H
You
know
10
seconds
plus
or
minus
a
second
or
two
because
of
like
random
network
issues
and
stuff
like
that,
and
then
the
second
thing
is:
if
they
don't
ping
within
specified
time
window,
we
remove
them
from
the
lobby
to
make
space
for
others,
and
the
only
reason
why
the
lobby
is
capped
is
to
have
some
sort
of
memory
constraints
so
that
it
doesn't
grow
indefinitely.
C
Okay,
so
what
was
that
that
all
sounds
pretty
reasonable
to
me?
What
is
the
ping
interval
before
you
get
kicked
out
of
the
lobby
that
you
had
in
mind.
H
H
C
C
Like
so
so
my
fear
is,
it
becomes
annoying
to
use
if
you
like,
lock
your
laptop
or
something
or
whatever.
Now
you
you
open
up
again
and
it's
been
more
than
whatever
three-minute
contribution,
time-out
kind
of
thing
and
now
you're
out
of
the
lobby,
and
you
got
to
relog
in
so
I'm
trying
to
think
if
we
can
reduce
the
timing
on
that
or
we'll
reduce
the
the
requirements
on
that.
So
one
option
would
just
be
to
kick
the
oldest
people
out
of
the
lobby
whenever
we
like
the
furthest
ping
in
the
past.
H
I
think
I
think
it
makes
sense
to
clean
the
lobby
a
bit
sooner,
because
then
people
can
see
how
many
people
are
trying
to
get
a
spot
right
now.
So
you
know
if
you
want
to
contribute,
but
you
don't
want
your
laptop
to
be
open
for
three
days.
You
can
just
you
know,
make
sure
that
there
is
a
reasonable
number
of
people
in
the
in
the
lobby.
H
Okay,
so
that's
one
thing
and
then
the
other
thing
is
in
theory.
I
don't
know
how
we
want
to
do
it
in
the
front
end
from
the
user
experience
point
of
view,
but
in
theory
you
can
log
in
but
not
join
the
lobby
and
not
being
the
sequencer.
So
like
you,
you
have
a
valid
session
and
that
session
could
be
separate
from
oh.
C
H
We
don't
we
don't
do
that
right
now.
I
think
right
for
now
to
keep
things
simple
lobby
and
the
sign-in
mechanism
yeah.
B
What
are
the
things
the
queue
was
providing
that
we
wanted
that
we
are
now
missing
out
on.
Like
one
thing,
the
queue
did
was
line
people
up
so
that
people
can
really
start
back
to
back
like
it
would.
Let's
say
you
have
a
queue
of
10
people.
B
One
is
currently
computing,
then,
at
the
moment
this
one
is
done
like
the
the
the
people
in
the
queue
would
be
on
a
much
higher
polling
interval
or
they
would
be
on
a
websocket
or
whatever
is
necessary
to
like
reach
out
to
them
quickly
and
they
can
be
started
immediately
after
the
previous
results
are
in
and
if
they
don't
respond
and
are
offline,
they
are
on
much
faster
timeouts,
so
they
immediately
get
get
kicked
and
the
next
one
is
called
on.
Basically.
C
H
It
doesn't
change
you
can.
You
can
have
like
a
high
frequency
pinging
for
for
this
lobby
mechanism
and
it's
gonna
be
the
same
kind
of
throughput
and
latency
yeah,
but.
D
Also,
queue
accumulates
a
better
ux
in
that,
if
I'm
in
a
queue,
I
know
how
long
I'm
going
to
spend
in
the
queue.
So
so
when
I,
when
I
join
and
I'm
10
in
the
queue
and
the
average
contribution
time
is
15
seconds,
I
know
that
I'm
going
to
be
in
the
queue
for
150
seconds
stops.
C
Right
but
like
the
queue
breaks
down
from
that
perspective,
once
it
gets
very
long
and
that's
that's
where
the
issues
start
coming
in
yeah
yeah,
so
so
I
think
we're
not
missing
anything
in
the
queue
versus
lobby
land,
but
I'm
just
a
little
bit
worried
about
the
sort
of
login
flow
here
if
there's
no
like
if
you're
gonna
have
to
relog
in.
If
you
go
offline
for
whatever
three
minutes,
if
we
can
push
that
up
to
I
don't
know
three
hours,
then
I
think
we're
starting
to
do.
Okay
again,.
H
That
should
be.
That
should
be
a
very
simple
change.
I
think
we
can
have
a
separate
timer
for
your.
Let's
call
it
a
session
and
separate
time
for.
B
Yeah
one
caveat
there
is
that
well
actually
do
we
want
the
actual
contribution
process
to
be
non-interactive?
Is
that
a
hard
requirement.
B
C
B
B
And
in
particular,
if
we
want
to
do
the
double
signing
mechanism,
then
we
actually
need
to
assign
the
tau
g2
point
or
at
least
a
fraction
like
a
factor
of
the
tau
g2
point.
B
We
can
do
that.
Wait,
wait,
wait.
B
B
I
mean
one
way
you
can
do
it
is
to
just
have
the
tower
g2
point:
have
the
towel,
basically
in
memory
and
ready
to
go
the
moment
you
log
in,
but
then
it
stays
in
memory
for
a
long
while,
which
is
like
not
super
desirable
yeah.
Another
thing
we
can
do
is
have
oh.
C
C
B
Can
but
then
you
need
to
then
then
these
then
the
bls
signature
changes
a
little
bit
in
that
you.
You
basically
have
a
towel
one
and
a
tau
two
yeah
where
the
towel
one
is
generated
on
login
and
you
can
bls
sign
using
your
towel
too,
and
then
you
sorry
using
the
towel
one.
B
You
know
and
then,
when
you
actually
contribute
you
non-interactively
collect
additional
entropy
at
the
moment
and
your
final
contribution
will
be
tau
one
times,
tau
two
yeah
and
then
you
just
do
you
just
do
a
proof
that
you
know
a
factor
of
tau
one
times.
E
B
Yeah,
I
I
need
to
like
write
out
the
exact.
C
A
Yeah
all
right,
so
we've
spent
like
20
ish
minutes
on
this.
G
B
Much
more
to
cover,
to
be
honest,
like
I
guess,
after
this
we
can,
we
can
talk
about
next
steps
and
audits.
Yeah
the
like
this
morning,
the
scroll
team
reached
out
and
said
they
wanted
to
contribute
and
kevin
were
also
there
and.
G
B
B
C
Nice
and
speaking
speaking
with
the
the
es
crypto
team,
they
were
also
talking
about
at
the
very
least,
doing
a
sanity
check.
So
rough
audit-
I
guess
of
this
as
well
so
excellent,
like
not
of
the
just
of
the
crypto
side
of
things
not
of
the
full
implementation,
but
enough
that
we
should
be
able
to
sanity
check
everything
that
I'd
be
comfortable
still
going
live
without
the
quad
full
audit.
A
And
this
that
wouldn't
the
crypto
stuff
includes
what's
already
been
audited,
is
that
correct.
C
A
B
Both
either
is
fine
depends
on
like
how
much
time
everyone
wants
to
sync
in
it,
but
I
I
think
the
other.
B
The
other
thing
with
auditing
is
that,
like
the
common
process,
is
code
freeze
and
then
throw
it
over
the
fence
and
have
them
look
at
it
for
two
weeks
and
then
you
get
a
report
back,
but
that's
not
necessarily
how
audits
need
to
work,
and
actually
a
lot
of
auditors
prefer
to
be
along
for
the
ride
and
like
criticize
designs
before
you
implement
them,
it's
a
little
bit
more
involved,
but
it
is
also
faster.
Ultimately,.
C
B
I
know
some
stuff
I
can
reach
out,
but
I
don't
know
for
the
person
that
just
reached
out
to
you
this
morning.
E
Yeah
he
said
he's
going
to
open
up
a
chat
to
into
to
basically
start
doing
start.
The
introduction.
Okay.
I
B
Cool
yeah,
we
can
also
some
more
ci
stuff.
We
can
do
some
cd
stuff
as
well.
We
can
spin
up
another
fly.
I
o
and
have
a
server
instance
a
staging
environment
up
and
running
at
all
times,
so
people
do
front-end
development.
C
I
I've
had
to
discuss
discussions
with
them
also
in
terms
of
like
the
actual
final
deployment
and
whatever
beefy
machines
we
need.
So
that's
that
should
all
be
lined
up.
It's
basically
not
the
point
of
just
tell
them
exactly
what
we
want
in
slash
need
and
go
from
there.
So
that's
also
looking
good
for
the
final
deployment.
We
can
get
that
a
bit
early
so
that
we
can.
B
Yeah,
do
you
want
to
use
that
for
staging
we're,
basically
ready
for
staging
right?
Now,
the
the
current
pipeline
builds
up
into
a
docker
container.
It
just
doesn't
get
the
point.
C
Yet
so
we
can
do
that.
Absolutely
I
guess
it's
just
a
question
of
like
how
much
like
this
is
overkill.
I'm
happy
to
run
it
for
an
extra
month,
so.
G
We'd
be
really
happy
if
that
was
up
and
running
so
so
it'd
be
great.
C
B
Yeah,
do
we
need
like
the
production
grade
performance,
yet
it
will
be
useful
for
benchmarking,
but
other
than
that
for
testing.
I
don't
think
we
need
to
have
a
super
expensive
server,
but
then
again,
like
a
month
of
whatever
it's
not
going
to
cost.
C
E
Yeah,
should
we
remove
the
fly
dot,
io
stuff,
it
was
sort
of
really
simple
to
push
it's
a
deployment
just
like
two,
like
one
command.
B
I
liked
it
by
the
day
I
looked
into
it.
I
can.
I
can
add,
that
to
the
to
the
ci
pipeline
easily,
I
probably
just
need
some
access
token
and
the
github
secrets.
A
Cool
it's
a
bit
backwards,
but
could
we
do
introductions
because
there's
a
lot
of
new
faces
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
everybody
knows
who's
who
and
where
they're
coming
from?
I
guess
we
can
start
with
the
faces
to
the
right
of
carl.
K
Okay,
I'm
philip
I'm
also
working
with
franco
together,
it's
broadcast
usually,
but
for
the
last
two
weeks
I've
been
mostly
working
on
the
participant,
and
I
mean
at
the
beginning
start
like
just
using
vanilla
arc
artworks
and
then
at
this
point
I
think
I've
implemented
like
three
different
versions
with
one
frame:
cosmo
optimized
version
of
arc
and
one
pst
and
one
vanilla
art.
K
B
Ramko
also
with
world
point
at
sbc,
I
asked
dan
grad
what
I
can
do
to
make
sure
proto
downgrading
gets
in
asap
and
he
told
me
to
build
a
to
build
a
trusted
service
ceremony.
So
here
I
am.
F
I
I
see
one
more,
I'm
dc
builder,
I'm
also
with
both
right
now,
I'm
looking
to
like
different.
J
I
Where
I
can
contribute,
so
I
really
care
about
the
kcg
very
well.
So
I
think
that
the
best
point
where
I
could
contribute
is
probably
the
front
end
for
it
and
maybe
like
look
over
at
the
well,
the
actual
server
or
the.
B
Yeah
also
from
the
worldpoint
team,
not
in
this
call,
is
miguel
who
probably
also
helped
out
with
the
front-end
yeah.
A
And
we
do
have
some
existing
people
working
on
the
front
end
subreddit.
Is
that
nicholas
or
am
I
misremembering.
L
L
Okay,
okay,
that
will
that
will
be
great,
so
yeah.
We,
we
will
coordinate
with
jeff
to
to
see
how
we
go.
I
I
have
a
question.
Well,
two
questions.
The
first
one
is
that,
according
to
to
the
specs,
it
is
say
that
the
client
needs
to
input
some
entropy
right
and
I
was
talking
with
philip
about.
If
we
could
use
this
entropy,
I
don't
know
I
a
string
or
whatever
the
the
client
sends.
L
I
use
it
and
use
that
like
a
seed
right,
we
were
thinking
philip
told
me
that
he
was
thinking
on
doing
like
the
string,
but
also
something
random,
but
they
I
don't
know
if
the
client
will
be
able
to
replicate
it
later
and
or
maybe
I
am
just
confusing
how
how
that
works.
L
That's
the
question
number
one
and
question
number
two.
If
I
am
not
wrong,
we
are
doing
like
four
computations
right,
so
we
will
need
to
to
input
four
entropies
right
and
the
api
will
work.
So
I
will
just
call
one
ap
request
to
contribute,
or
I
will
have
to
call
four
times.
C
I
E
B
Of
entropy
contribution
we
can
just
expand
as
long
as
there's
sufficient
entropy
in
in
a
single
contribution
that
should
cryptographically
be
fine.
There's
no,
no
reason
to
like
have
four
separate,
especially
like
four
separate
smash,
the
keyboard
things
that
that
doesn't
seem
that
doesn't
make
much
sense.
For
me.
We
do
plan
to.
L
E
C
C
A
L
A
G
Yourself
there
you
go:
yeah:
okay,
yeah,
I'm
jeff
from
ef's
privacy
and
scaling
team.
So
we're
we're
we're
focusing
on
the
ui
aspects
of
this
so
yeah
great
to
work
with
all
you.
You
guys.
A
Awesome
greg
yeah.
H
Hi
I'm
greg.
I
also
work
for
for
world
coin.
I'm
based
out
of
poland,
and
I
was
I
joined
last
week.
I
was
working
on
the
sequencer
part
of
things
so
making
sure
that
each
gets
a
contribution
slot
and
that
we
have
high
throughput.
A
Cool
martin
is
that
how
you
pronounce
your
name.
D
Yes,
that
is
exactly
how
we
pronounce
it
right,
so
I'm
martina,
I
work
with
raid
apps,
which
currently
is
working
with
wired
coin
and
also
trying
to
push
the
back
end
across
as
soon
as
possible.
A
Awesome,
I
guess
we
could
just
go
all
around.
This-
is
the
first
call
with
everybody,
so
I'm
on
the
protocol
support
team,
which
is
typically
does
network
upgrades.
This
is
more
of
like
a
focus
project
that
I've
taken
on.
So
I
would
say,
co-leading
with
carl
carl
does
a
lot
of
the
technical
stuff
and
I'm
doing
more
of
the
coordination
type
activities.
E
E
Yeah
I
I
work
at
aztec
and
the
pretty
ef.
I
usually
do
vocal,
try
stuff.
E
A
H
Yeah,
I'm
takamichi,
and
I
am
also
from
psc
team
in
the
epf,
and
I
I'm
mostly
working
with
jeff,
nico
and
shelley
and
building
from
then
for
the
the
ceremony.
A
All
right
awesome,
so
we've
got
a
lot
of
front
end
people
which
is
great
but
yeah.
A
I
have
a
feeling
there
might
be
not
enough
work
to
go
around,
but
I
guess
we'll
get
there
when
we
get
there
or
we'll
find
out
quickly
where
people
can
be
used
and
where
you
know
where
people
can
be
productive.
Charlie.
A
Awesome
yeah
and
you've
been
doing
great
work
yeah.
I
will
probably
be
working
with
you.
I
know
I
keep
saying
this,
but
this
time
I'm
serious
I'll
be
helping
you
with
it
with
the
copy.
Hopefully
to
make
this
more
than
just
a
you
know,
a
dry
explanation
of
what
trusted
setups
are:
give
it
a
little
bit
of
spice
and
some
magic
yeah
yeah,
so
that'll
be
fun.
A
And
then
we
have
ahmed,
I
think,
last
time
you
said
you
were
just
here
observing,
but
if
you
want
to
give
an
intro
feel
free.
J
M
Hello
guys
I
am
into
the
fellowship
protocol
apprenticeship
is
apply.
I
am
also
the
contributor
for
the
eip
bot
into
the
eip
editor
editors
group.
I
contribute
via
ecs,
I'm
very
interested
in
the
in
all
this
development
for
the
what
we
are.
Actually
you
guys
are
doing.
I
mean
I'm
I'm
observing
I,
but
I'm
really
interested
in
this.
This
part
of
the
ecosystem
and
we'll
see
how
it
goes
with
the
application
for
the
for
the
fellowship.
M
I
was
into
the
core
one
not
funded,
and
I
work
into
the
apis
comparison
between
clients
and,
basically,
a
a
brief
comparison
between
apis
between
get
and
nevermind.
Well,
thank
you
and
just
here
to
learn
and
contribute.
A
Awesome
yeah
we're
very
glad
to
have
you
and
ahmet
along
for
the
ride
so
yeah
thanks
everybody
for
doing
intros.
Hopefully
this
group
doesn't
grow
too
much
larger,
otherwise,
it'll
get
pretty
difficult
to
keep
track
of
everybody,
but
this
is
great.
There's
a
ton
of
people
that
we
can
put
on
different
parts
of
this
project,
and
this
is
important
because
the
goal
is
to
have
an
mvp
by
devcons.
But
that's
in
four
weeks,
ish
four
weeks,
okay,
yeah
merge
was
today
the
15th
def.
A
Con
is
a
little
bit
before
it
so
yeah,
let's
say
three
weeks
and
the
goal
is
to
have
an
mvp.
We
have
a
slot
on
the
main
stage,
and
so
you
know
this
doesn't
have
to
be
the
full
presentation
or
the
the
full
interface.
All
we
need
is
a
simple
gated
access.
We
enter
a
code
what's
up.
C
C
Exactly
we
don't
need
open
any
awards
for
second
bill,
but
we
do.
We
do
need
it
stable
enough
that
we're
not
gonna,
hurt
people
and
most
of
like
we
can't
have
the
the
coordinator.
Sorry
sequencer
rejecting
people
or
the
worst
would
be
if
it
accepts
an
incorrect
contribution
right.
C
Yeah
yeah
so
like
slightly
slightly
buggy
or
like
you
fail
to
log
in
or
whatever,
if
that
happens
once
in
a
while,
that's
okay,
as
long
as
that's
not
the
the
predominant
experience
but
yeah,
that's
okay!.
A
C
Oh
so,
a
while
ago,
when,
when
it
was
not
looking
like
this,
was
going
to
be
shippable
by
devpen,
the
idea
was
to
do
a
gated
version
where
there
was
like
a
login
screen.
Where
you'd
do
this
and
you'd
get
a
specific
token,
which
would
only
be
valid
for
one
contribution,
and
then
you
could
do
it
and
we'd
hand
this
out
to
some
people
in
the
space
to
sort
of
test
it
out
and
have
a
close
closed,
beta
kind
of
thing
before
you
open
it
up
to
everyone.
C
That's
fine
yeah,
okay,
that
the
idea
here
be
that
we
wouldn't
necessarily
keep
this
all
super
secret.
But
it's
not
available
at
address
that
we
publicize
it's
just
people.
We
trust
anyway
to
to
to
not
do
this
particularly
then,
because
we
can
give
the
low
contribution
numbers
to
the
big
names
in
the
space
such
that.
If
you
go
over
the
contribution
file
and
just
open
it,
it's
going
to
list
the
names.
You'd
expect,
first,
just
easier
for
sanity
checking
or
yeah
press
generator.
A
Got
it
okay,
so
the
big
thing
next
steps
was
defcon,
it
sounds
like
that's
going
to
be
manageable
and
then
following
that
would
be
the
sigma
prime
audit,
which
is
sort
of
scheduled
a
couple
months
ago,
and
there
we
intend
to
have
them
review
sequencer.
I
guess
that's
what
we're
calling
it
now
and
I
guess
that
would
fall
after
defcon.
We
had
slated
it
to
start
during
death
time,
but
that's
not
gonna
work,
so
I
guess
it'd
be
after
defcon
when
in
fact
we're
already
receiving
contributions.
A
I
guess
this
is
okay,
given
we
would
also
be
receiving
some
sort
of
review
from
scroll
and
also
from
the
crypto
team,
so
feels
like
four
four
reviews
is
probably
sufficient
for
this
project
and,
if
some
bugs
make
it
through
that,
then
I
think
we've
got
bigger
problems.
C
Yeah,
the
the
failure
cases
here
are
either
so
terrible
everything
collapses
and
it
will
be
obvious
or
we
should
be
able
to
recover
from
them
without
too
much
technical
and,
more
importantly,
political
damage
right
exactly
yeah.
So
I
think.
B
That's
actually
a
good
point.
We
should
make
sure
we
emphasize
reliability
and
stability
in
the
audit
and
not
hyper
focus
on
the
cryptography
aspects
of
it,
because
that
that's
auditable
after
the
fact
yeah
that
point
we
just
want
to
make
sure
people
are
not
going
to
ddos
or
deface
the.
B
I
can
sketch
something
out.
I
I
consider
it
like
a
very
nice
to
have
and
I'll
I'll
try
and
get
it
in,
but
we
can
launch
without
it.
C
Well,
launching
a
thought
means
that
the
the
people
we
have
with
the
low
contributions
of
putting
people
in
the
space
means
they
won't
have
it
and,
if
anything,
they're
the
most
important
people
to
have
it
so
fair
enough,
yeah,
okay,
I
I
think
let's
have
a
discussion
after
this
call.
Yes
hash
out
exactly
what
it
would
look
like
see
if
it's
something
we
can
like
implement
now
yeah
put
in
the
specs
today
kind
of
thing,
and
if
not,
then,
can
it.
A
Okay,
a
couple
other
things
came
to
mind,
so
the
first
audit
is
complete
and
they've
written
up
a
file
kev.
I
believe
you
reviewed
it.
Is
there
anything
else
outstanding
from
that
engagement
that
we
need
to.
A
E
No,
I
think
everything's
been
taken
care
of
and
they
yeah
they
did
a
good
ride
up
to
say
what
they
looked
for,
what
they
couldn't
find
as
well,
so
yeah
they
didn't
train
anything
sort
of
significant,
so
yeah,
as
I
said,
I
don't
know,
if
that's
a
good
or
bad
thing,
but
yeah.
A
Yeah,
okay,
great
and
is
there.
B
Analysis
available
somewhere
there
are
still
some
changes
we
would
like
to
do
in
the
crypto
end
or
some
performance
further
performance.
Optimizations
that
can
be
done
would
be
good
to
look
at
what
they
are
looking
for.
I
A
Great,
I
think
that
my
video,
let
me
double
check
the
agenda.
A
I
think
that's
everything
is
it.
I
guess
one
thing
that
comes
to
mind:
do
is
there
a
single
person,
who's
leading
the
interface
or
is
it
sort
of
different
people
are
touching
different
parts.
C
Multiple
teams,
yes,
my
understanding
is
they're,
multiple,
multiple
interfaces-
oh
yeah.
Okay.
So
at
the
moment
it's
my
my
understanding
and
there's
something
happened.
While
I
wasn't
speaking
to
people.
Is
that
there's
the
the
interface
you're
working
on
and
then
the
pse
interface
is
that
is
that
correct?
That
line
up
for
everyone's
sounds.
C
So
the
like,
the
interfaces
are
actually
where
we
get
the
security
from
and
bugs
in
the
interface
then
propagate
like
if
the
setup
is
broken.
It's
going
to
happen
because
of
the
interface
okay,
the
sequence,
so
we
can
always
audit
that
not
not
ordered.
We
will
verify
that,
like
all
the
clients
will
do
this.
That's
like
what
we'll
know
is
something
went
wrong
there.
The
the
risk
of
breaking
the
setup
would
be
if
there's
a
bug
in
the
participant,
so
we
want
as
many
as
many
implementations
as
possible
of
of
the
participants.
C
C
So
there'd
be
I
mean
that
there
are
two
options
here:
one
is
a
single
url
and
then
it
presents
you
with
a
to
choose:
choose
your
own
adventure
style
link,
a
or
b,
and
we
can
just
randomize
the
order.
The
buttons
show
up
in
there.
The
alternative
is
to
have
two
urls
and
then
like
they
link
out
to
the
sequencer,
which
is
always
at
a
single
location.
C
A
C
D
C
From
there,
because
I
guess
that
this
is.
A
C
Are
these
are
sub
domains?
I
think
we
should
try
to
keep
them
as
like
isolated,
like
isolated
deployments
or
isolated
servers
serving
the
files.
So
I
guess
like
where
do
you
get
linked
to
from
this.
B
A
C
A
C
As
kaz
says,
there's
also
he's
he's
got
his
cli
part
of
what
I'm
wanting
to
do
here
at
zk8
is
to
show
more
people
to
write
their
own
little
implementations.
That
kind
of
thing
re,
like
really,
I
think
we
can
get
up
to.
B
Yeah
related
point:
actually
that
is
still
on
the
agenda.
If
we,
if
we
still
have
time
for
a
trend.
B
So
right
now
we
move
some
of
the
crypto
codes
to
the
ceremony
sequencer,
but
my
idea
is
to
turn
this
into
a
shared
library
that
can
also
compile
to
wasm
also
does
a
little
bit
of
the
json
encoding
stuff,
and
then
the
clients
can
share
this
code.
B
Obviously,
the
downside
of
that
is
that
we
remove
some
of
the
diversification
in
terms
of
crypto
implementation.
However,
we
can
make
this
shared
library
have
multiple
backends.
We
can
implement
it
on
both
artworks
and
both
and
blsd
that
should
be
doable
so
yeah.
It's
generally
bringing
this
idea
of
of
creating
a
tcg
ceremony
lib,
I
guess
repository
where
we
will
have
a
crypto
core
and
then
some
utility
functions
around
it
around
the
file
formats
that
can
compile
the
wasm.
That
will
be
really
easy
for
the
front-end
front-end
to
integrate.
C
So
note
this
was
kind
of
already
the
design
a
bit
with
the
whole
sdk.
This
is
just,
I
guess,
formalizing
into
its
own
repo.
Now
that's
already
what
like
the
work.
Kev
did
initially
when
he
started
writing
his
own
little
crypto
thing
and
it's
what
we've
audited
with
the
idea
of
it
being
used.
I
guess
this
is
just
now
being
slightly
more
formal
as
to
what
that
is.
You
can.
B
Make
powers
of
style
one
of
the
back-end
options
for
sure.
B
Yeah,
it
just
needs
a
little
bit
of
refactoring
and
thinking
about
the
architecture
to
make
it.
I
I
do
want
to
like
split
it
up
into
separate
crates
within
the
repo
where
the
crypto
is
like
its
own,
its
own
separate
thing,
which
just
makes
auditing
a
lot
easier.
C
So
I
I
guess,
then
the
only
really
important
thing
to
make
sure
here
is
that
we
just
remain
consistent
with
the
sdk
or
I
don't
know
if
there's
a
additional
interfaces
that
jeff
you
guys
are
using
on
the
like.
G
Yeah
so
we've
switched
to
philips
welcome
stuff,
which
is
a
similar
interface,
and
it's
just
starting
the
the
srs
in
and
the
entropy
right.
E
B
Speaking
of
entropy,
do
we
want
to
offer
some
sort
of
key
stretching
primitive,
like
argon
2
as
part
of
this
crypto
toolkit.
B
B
C
The
reason
this
is
relevant
is
basically,
if
you're
taking
user
input.
You
have
to
do
this
anyway
in
order
to
do
it
in
a
reasonably
secure
manner,
because
user
input
is
not
really
random.
It's
somewhat
random,
but
not
like
uniformly
random,
even
if
there
were
two
keyboards
smash
really
well
or
wiggle
mouse
really
well,
so
it's
just.
How
do
you
turn
that
user
input
into
something
that
looks
more
uniform
in
its
randomness,
and
this
is
would
be
a
standardized
way
of
doing
it?
I
guess
the
only
thing
is
now.
C
This
is
another
thing
in
the
pipeline,
which
would
be
common
to
both
implementations
and
would
touch
the
secret,
so
just
need
to
be
a
little
bit
careful
as
to
what
we
do
here,
but
it's
not
like
you,
don't
have
to
use
it.
If
it's
there
right,
it
is
an
option.
But
realistically,
if
you
ask
trying
to
standardize,
this
would
be
common.
I
don't
know
what
you
guys
have
done
in
the
past
for
this
jeff
in
terms
of
turning
user
input
into
something
proper.
L
C
B
B
B
Function,
I
think
one.
I
B
C
B
C
Guys
started
doing
this
already
started
doing
the
the
wiggly
mouse
stuff
in
terms
of
actual
implementation.
C
G
E
Up
yeah,
I'm
just
gonna
quickly
say
the
way
that
I
did
it
was
I
just
hashed,
the
user
input
and
then
just
x
sort
it
with
a
random.
Whatever
I
got
from
like
you,
random
random.
E
But
with
the
with
hashing
and
xor
in
it
means
that
it
doesn't
matter
if
the
user
does
rubbish.
Input
like
it
was
just
a
is
it
doesn't
matter
because
your
xor
in
it
with
dev
random.
E
A
All
right
so
yeah,
I'm
gonna,
wrap
up
here.
This
is
a
very
fast-paced
productive
call.
I
think
thank
you,
everybody
for
contributing
and
sounds
like
everybody
has
an
idea
of
what
they're
doing,
if
not,
please
put
it
in
the
public
channel.
While
everyone
is
at
zk
summit
carl,
you
reminded
me
that,
yes,
we
do
need
to
start
thinking
about
this
special.
A
I
mean
there's
two
sort
of
special
cases
outside
of
the
public
ceremony,
which
is
anybody
who
wants
to
roll
their
own
implementation.
If
we're
not
already
there,
we
should
start
thinking
about
how
to
make
it
as
easy
as
possible
for
somebody
to
do
this.
What
do
they
need
to
know?
What
sort
of
docs
do
they
need
access
to,
yeah
that
basic
pitch
and
then
the
other
thing
is
we
want
to
start
getting
the
special
contributions
of
you
know
somebody
doing
it
on
a
satellite
or
whatever
yeah
wacky
stuff.
A
That
will
be
a
part
of
part
of
the
story,
the
narrative
of
where
we're
getting
our
randomness
from
so
you
can
show
that
to
people
which
I'm
sure
you're,
probably
already
gonna
do.
But
yes,
okay,
summit's,
a
great
place
to
do
that.
M
C
And
so
yeah,
let's
discuss
this
async,
but
yeah
that'd
be
a
basic
idea,
but
always
welcome
to
these
things
and
I
think
the
channels
have
been
public
channels
becoming
more
and
more
useful,
but
between
that
and
issues
on
all
the
repos,
I
think
that's
probably
the
best
way
to
keep
communication
going.
A
Excellent
all
right
yeah,
thank
you
again
everybody
and
we
will
talk
in
two
weeks
at
a
minimum
and
in
the
discord.
Definitely
all.