►
From YouTube: Ethereum Core Devs Meeting #54 [2019-02-01]
Description
A
A
A
C
C
A
And
okay
sounds
good
and
I.
Think
yeah
most
of
the
miners
I
mean
if
there
is
a.
If
there's
another
incident
like
last
time
with
the
rob
stand
fork
we'll
just
learn
more
lessons
from
that
see
what
happens
when
we
have
a
two
forks
at
the
same
time?
Oh,
no!
Actually
for
the
Robson
Fork
we're
just
doing
one
fork.
Aren't
we
yeah.
B
A
B
B
A
A
C
A
That's
what
I
was
expecting
sure
and
then
the
next
item
is
the
proof
of
stake
finality
gadget
on
the
proof-of-work
chain
for
serenity.
That
was
on
there
last
time
too,
so
I
kept
it
on
I,
don't
know
if
Danny
or
Vitalik
are
available,
because
they're
at
the
Stanford
conference
and
they'd
be
the
best
people
to
answer
that.
So
we
might
just
need
to
keep
that
on
for
next
time.
Unless
someone
wants
to
speak
on
that.
A
A
The
reason
for
that
is
to
test
the
viability
of
the
claims
that
were
made
about
Prague
pal,
such
as
the
fact
that
it
is
that
it
is
even
across
all
types
of
forks
or
sorry
all
types
of
like
cards
like
AMD
and
NVIDIA,
and
a
six
and
FPGAs
that
it
has
the
same
like
hash
rate
and
performance
and
also
that
there's
not
going
to
be
any
problems
once
we
launch
it
on
main
net.
So
like
testing
things
about
it
to
make
sure
that
it
like
works
correctly.
A
Yeah
I'm
not
like
in
tuned
technically
with
what
all
is
gonna
be
tested
quite
yet,
but
we're
working
on
that
and
we're
also
looking
for
funding
for
that.
So,
if
anyone's
listening
on
the
call
and
interested
in
funding
a
prague,
pal
audit
will
probably
be
calling
for
that
soon
and
you
can
reach
out
to
me
same
thing
with
any
organisation
on
the
call.
B
E
Other
comments,
any
update
on
that
they're
gonna
be
clarifying
some
of
the
specification
part
because
I
tried
implementing
it
a
few
weeks
ago
and
halfway
through
the
spec,
it
turns
into
implement
this
code
block
there's
like
no
narrative,
no
unit
tests
and
it
seems
very
heavily
weighted
towards
please
these
are
patches
which
is
not
something
I'm
wild
about.
So
any
update
on
any
of
that
from
them
or
I.
Haven't.
E
So,
for
some
things
like
in
the
spec,
they
have
some
undefined
constants
like
dag
bytes
I,
figured
that
that's
the
size
of
the
bytes
of
the
dag,
but
everything
else
is
presumed
in
word,
sizes,
32-bit
words,
there's
also
some
readability
concerns
I
have
with
the
weight
specified,
makes
perfect
sense
to
people
fluency,
but
things
like
JavaScript
and
Python
aren't
gonna,
be
able
to.
You
know,
easily
employed
the
subtleties
and
get
you
know
like
any
reference
types
of
of
numerics,
which
is
hard
to
read
reference
types
of
structures.
E
Are
you
know
everyone
gets
that
instinctively,
but
there's
just
you
know
some
readability
of
amenability
things
that
I
think
should
be
improved.
If
we're
gonna
call
this
a
spec,
that's
gonna
be
implemented
because,
right
now
it
just
feels
like
that.
Here's
our
patches
go
for
and
parity
again,
which
this
is
not
something
I'd
rather
see
some
generic
specification.
It's
easily
nineteen's
necessary
easily
implementable.
Some
of
its
skilled
in
the
art
can
implement
without
too
much
difficulty.
A
E
E
A
B
Is
to
just
implement
it
and
basically
let
the
world
decide.
Do
we
want
it
or
not?
That
could
be
done
if
we
implement
it
in
the
clients,
I
mean
merge
it
into
the
mainline
lines
and
decide
on
like
some
block
number
and
we
could
beforehand.
We
could
decide
that.
Well,
if
the
some
random
thing
Bitcoin
norms
on
a
particular
number,
if
it
is
even
then
the
clients
will
default
to,
we
will
put
the
default
option
to
enable
it.
B
If
it
is
odd,
we
will
put
in
it
not
by
default,
not
enabled,
and
otherwise
users
will
be
expected
to
set
their
preference
go
with
it.
They'll
go
without
it.
That
would
be
one
way
to
do
it.
Then
we
don't
really
make
a
decision.
We
just
lift
up
for
the
world.
One
drawback,
that
is,
that
there
will
be
less
hashes
per
second
with
Prague
cow.
So
if
we
compare
the
I
mean
the
the
difficulty
is
expected
to
go
down
on
profile.
So.
A
B
E
This
is
something
that
they
maybe
eat.
Cat
burgers
should
have
a
discussion
in
the
community
because
I'm
concerned,
if
we
do
stuff
like
block
voting,
that
we
risk
splitting
the
chain
unnecessarily
I
think
you
know
the
cat
herders
would
have
a
better
pulse
on
the
needs
of
the
users
of
the
needs
of
the
miners.
Rather
they
relied
on
the
animal
system.
Like
my
cache
numbers.
A
B
A
B
F
H
I'm
glad
that
that
some
folks
have
strong
opinions
about
it,
I
just
feel
that
a
number
of
core
devs
have
kind
of
said
the
opposite
right
that
they
don't
feel
like
qualified
to
make
this
decision
so
and
we
have
like
a
maybe
we
can
look
at
our
menu
of
options,
which
is
pretty
short
right.
One
is
sort
of
decide
not
to
decide.
A
second
is
decide
one
way
or
the
other.
A
third
is
I
think
it
was
Martin
who
suggested
implement
both
and
maybe
have
some
randomness.
H
B
H
B
I
Yeah
I,
this
is
Piper
I,
honestly,
don't
know
what
to
do
here.
I've
largely
stayed
out
of
the
discussion,
because
my
expertise
in
the
area
is
not
adequate
to
make
a
decision
and
making
an
informed
decision
from
other
people's
research
is
also
hard
because
it's
hard
to
know
who
to
listen,
to
which
informations
right
things
like
that
and
my
claim
said
it's
a
decision.
That's
frankly,
I'm
not
excited
about
making
for
the
network.
A
H
If,
if
we
can
write
an
algorithm
right
to
put
this
in
computer
science
terms
right,
it's
a
bit
like,
let's
say
we
decide
to
do
this
audit
and
the
output
is
X
right,
so
it
turns
out
that
it
is
or
is
not.
You
know,
compatible
across
different
hardware,
whatever
the
what
might
be.
If,
before
that
process,
we
can
commit
to
a
course
of
action.
Given
the
output
of
that
process,
I
might
support
that.
Does
that
make
sense,
yeah.
H
H
B
B
Investigation,
whether
it's
difficult
to
make
specialized
circuit
for
it-
and
it
sounds
like
a
typical
mining
firm
and
in
mining
operators,
current
GPU
owners
who
actually
have
a
sorted
set
of
GPUs
like
they
would
test
these
things
and
determine.
Does
this
work
for
my
type
of
GPU
and
the
pools
should
really
kind
of
already
have
this
data
based
on
the
test
net,
which
they've
been
experimenting
with,
am
I
being
naive,
I
mean?
B
I
I
I
A
Think
that
we
still
haven't
explored
all
the
possibilities
about
getting
community
feedback
before
we're
forced
to
make
a
decision,
including
stuff,
like
this
audit,
which
I
consider
a
piece
of
community
feedback,
so
I
think
that
we
don't
need
to
make
this
decision
the
the
latest
we
could
make
a
decision
on
this
would
be
or
I
guess,
I'll
put
it
this
way.
Is
it?
Is
it
possible?
B
A
I
think
by
thoroughly
tested
it
needs
to
be
like
danos.
Concerns
need
to
be
met,
it
needs
to
be
implementation.
Set,
there
needs
to
be
I
mean
I
was
looking
at
some
stuff
on
the
prog
pal
minor,
on
the
gangnam
tests
net
branch
the
other
day,
and
there
were
people
saying
it
was
making
AMD
cards
fail
even
yesterday,
so
like
it
doesn't
it
just
feels
like
it's
not
ready,
which
is
why.
G
A
A
Let
me
let
me
copy
and
paste
some
of
the
notes
we
put
the
other
day
from
the
meeting.
I
was
in
and
the
reason
I
don't
want
to
give
away
too
much
about
the
meeting
is
so
that
it
stays
neutral
until
we
get
enough
stakeholders
in
there
and
make
sure
we
secure
funding.
So
it's
not
we're
not
calling
anyone
out,
but
I
can
I
should
be
able
to
post
some
of
this
stuff
right
now
and
the
zoom
chat.
Oh.
A
It
didn't
format
it
great,
but
it's
basically
question
after
question
and
that's
only
that's
only
part
of
it
there's
other
things
we're
also
deciding
there's
like
non-technical
due
diligence
as
a
piece
of
this.
So
given
the
current
Hardware,
how
would
this
affect
GPUs
participating
as
minors?
Is
there
an
alternative
approach?
What's
the
timeline
for
switching?
A
What's
the
expected
impact
on
the
current
miner
ecosystem
is
what
they
replicated
is
what
they
replicated.
What
the
specification
says,
does
Pro
groundbreaker
fishin'
see
an
ASIC
chips
etcetera,
so
it's
a
pretty
thorough.
It's
a
pretty
thorough
audit
spec
that
we're
expecting
one
to
two
groups
to
complete,
and
it's
one
of
those
things
where
there's
probably
not
a
group.
That's
perfect
to
do
this,
but
there
are
groups
that
can
come
up
with
most
of
this,
and
that
would
be
better
than
nothing
or
having
two
groups
do
it
so
that
it
completely
takes
all
of
it.
A
A
H
E
G
Calming
down
a
little
I'm
happy
to
get
more
information,
I
just
want
some
decision
that
says
this:
is
the
information
willing
to
get
and
then
we're
going
to
decide
then
I'm
very
opposed
to
the
notion
of
we
can't
decide
so
we'll
go
to
the
effort
to
let
the
hash
power
decide.
I,
don't
see
risking
a
split
in
the
network
just
because
we
can't
make
our
mind
up
in
the
u.s.
system.
At
least
you
take
a
jury
of
ordinary
people,
they
listen
to
the
experts
and
they
decide
yeah.
A
I
A
I
We're
gonna
have
some
meeting
down
the
road
to
actually
make
this
decision.
This
might
not
be
a
popular
opinion,
but
I
think
that
should
happen
behind
closed
doors
and
then
we
can
open
up
exactly
what
was
discussed
after
the
meeting,
because
that's
one
of
the
problems
with
trying
to
make
these
types
of
decisions,
something
our
core
devs
call.
Is
that
we're
all
on
stage
and
it's
not
entirely
a
safe
place
to
try
out
ideas
and
try
out
opinions,
and
this
is
a
contentious
topic.
E
Well,
take
a
very
important
voice,
we're
missing
as
the
voice
of
the
miners,
the
people
who
are
miners,
we're
talking
about
it,
where
only
those
who
are
rapidly
in
favor
of
prog
pal,
so
I
think
we
need
to
have
a
meeting,
and
these
miners
will
probably
want
to
be
behind
closed
doors.
We
ask
people
mining
on
aetherium,
especially
the
ones
who
have
a
voiced,
an
opinion
on
prog
pal
I
think
they
have
a
very
important
stake
that
we
need
to
discuss.
If
we
can't
do
that,
that's
the
way
they
run
their
business.
H
I've
read
random
ideas.
Last
question:
I
want
to
throw
out.
This
may
be
impossible,
but
as
I'm
sure
you
guys
all
know
like
Bitcoin
does
things
with
minor
signalling
right
where
they
have
miners
that
particular
signal
bits
on
the
blocks
that
they
mined
I
suspect.
One
reason
we
haven't
done
this
historically
with
etherium
is
that
miners
play
a
different
role
in
our
ecosystem,
but
given
that
we're
looking
for
input
specifically
from
miners
here
when
people
consider
doing
that
in
this
case
like
to
see
which
they
support
so.
B
A
H
Okay,
all
right
so
turning
the
question
around
assuming
you
guys
are
right.
If,
if
we're
not
looking
for
feedback
from
miners,
then
who
are
we
looking
for
feedback
from
I
mean
we're
just
sort
of
saying
that
community
loosely
defined?
Let's
not
get
stuck
on
this
topic
for
an
hour,
because
it's
complicated
yeah.
A
That,
too,
is
something
that
is
gonna,
be
maybe
like.
So
a
lot
of
the
reason
people
are
against
Prague
Pal
has
been
conspiracy,
theorists,
kinda
ish
from
my
perspective,
so
to
cut
through
that
would
require
having
the
audit
come
out
with
results,
and
if
that
quells
everyone's
concerns,
then
to
me
the
community
looks
like
they're
in
favor
of
prague
pal,
that's
my
opinion.
A
H
Just
speaking
for
myself,
the
audit
would
give
me
more
confidence
to
like
make
a
decision
here.
It's
sort
of
a
symmetric
in
the
sense
that
like
if
like,
if
something
turns
out
to
be
really
wrong
with
cog
cow,
then
that
would
be,
as
someone
said
earlier,
like
pretty
decisive.
But
if
there
are
no
red
flags,
then
we're
probably
still
in
the
same
situation
we're
in
right
now,
which
is
to
say
it's
still
controversial.
A
B
A
H
A
E
A
Yeah,
this
is
a
big
enough
deal
that
I
don't
think
it's
a
waste
of
time
to
keep
implementing,
while
the
audits
going
on,
because
if
it
happens
in
parallel,
then
we
can
say:
okay,
everything
is
implemented
as
the
audits
ending
we
didn't
find
anything
and
if,
along
the
way,
there's
a
major
red
flag,
that's
found
in
the
audit.
We
can
just
ask
the
auditors
to
immediately
let
us
know
so
we
can
stop
implementation.
H
A
A
Sounds
good,
so
we're
definitely
gonna
go
ahead
with
that
and
then
from
that
audit.
Let's
continue
to
implement
prog
Pao
and
make
sure
that
we
have,
if
def
else,
give
very
clear
specifications
and
stuff
like
that,
so
that
we
can
continue
to
implement
it
with
the
idea
that
if
there
are
no
red
flags
found
and
the
cat
herders
come
back
very
soon
to
say
this
is
probably
what
the
community
would
want.
Then,
with
that
combination
that
should
give
us
enough
confidence
to
have
the
decision
kind
of
be
made
for
us
almost.
I
I
I
That
much
but
but
that's
my
assertion
is
that
we
can't
actually
see
that
it
shows
strong
support.
Like
we've
got
a
pool
that
has
a
very
large
majority.
We've
got
like
there's
all
kinds
of
ways
in
theory
that
that
it
could
be
gamed
like
it's
and
in
either
direction.
It
goes,
there's
a
story
that
you
can
tell
about
why
it
went
that
direction
and
why
it
isn't
good
information.
C
A
A
A
B
A
I
meant
is
when
you're
collecting
the
data.
If
someone
says
I
support
it
exclamation
point
versus
support
if
you're
running
a
script
to
try
to
calculate
all.
That
is
that
is
that
something
that
would
be
happening
is
someone
running
through
and
trying
to
count
the
number
of
times
they
say
the
word
support,
or
should
we
have
like
an
acronym
that
is
meaning
explicitly
support
or
not
support,
I.
D
B
D
H
A
Have
the
cat
herders
do
some
investigation
or
come
up
with
some
ideas
that
people
haven't
come
up
with
before,
because
we've
kind
of
been
stuck
in
an
echo
chamber
of
all
this
stuff
in
a
little
bit
hesitant
to
make
decisions
and
then,
finally,
let's
do
a
timeline
for
when
we
should
decide
stuff
I
think
if
we
don't
we're
gonna
go
with
this
forever
I.
Don't.
A
A
Yes,
April
is
what
we
talked
about,
but
that
was
because
they
asked
me
to
put
it.
They
asked
me
to
put
a
date
on
there
and
I
said
well
if
it's
not
going
in
still
Istanbul
April,
but
we
haven't
told
like
explicitly
any
of
the
people
who
are
doing
the
audit,
that
it
has
to
be
April
or
anything
like
that
or
that
it
it
was
still
kind
of
a
little
up
in
the
air.
Okay,.
G
B
I
G
A
The
etherium
1x
stanford
meeting
it
went
really
well,
there
was
about
30
people,
it
wasn't
just
core
devs.
It
was
also
virtual
machine
experts.
It
was
DAP
developers
from
a
few
major
daps.
There
was
people
who
were
like
unaffiliated
core
developers
and
just
experts
in
aetherium
in
general,
so
there
were
some
good
conversations.
A
And
again,
these
objectives
were
something
that
were
brought
up
by
Aleksey.
They
were
not
something
that
was
explicitly
agreed
to
from
everyone
in
the
room
at
all,
and
we
didn't
even
really
get
to
a
conclusion
on
number
four,
so
there
hasn't
been
a
social
contract
made
specifically
that
I'm
aware
of,
but
that
was
an
idea
that
Alexi
had
so.
The
general
thing
was
is
the
etherium
network.
A
A
The
format
was
like
five
to
six
short
presentations
in
the
morning
and
also
in
the
afternoon,
followed
by
a
breakout
session,
followed
by
individual
work
from
everybody.
It
was
very
laid-back.
It
was
very
ad
hoc.
There
was
a
lot
of
good
discussion
happening
and
I
think
that
it
was.
There
was
some
really
good
takeaways
all
the
videos
for
from
the
presentations
or
online
I'd
say
there's
about,
let's
see,
maybe
10
hours
of
video
from
the
presentations,
and
so,
if
you
want
to
look
in
on
some
of
that,
it's
it's
interesting
stuff.
A
So,
let's
go
over
some
of
the
working
groups.
Alexi
isn't
here
to
talk
about
state
fees
which,
by
the
way,
we
renamed
it
from
state
rent
to
state
fees
because
it
involves
stuff
like
lock
ups
now,
so
it's
more
of
a
framework
of
ideas,
then
specifically
rent,
so
we're
calling
it
state
fees.
Now
when
we're
referring
to
Alexie's
work,
and
then
we
have
the
e
wasum
group,
the
testing
simulation
group
in
the
chain
pruning
group-
and
we
don't
have
Peter
or
Fred
here
today-
to
do
trained
pruning
either.
A
J
A
J
J
There's
interest
in
in
getting
a
lot
of
people
call,
so
we
we
have
to
just
think
how
many
compossible
would
really
want
to
add.
People
expect
that
they
will
be
able
to
add
their
own
plate
composite
like
vertically
so
yeah.
That's
that's
not
going
to
happen.
Oh
actually,
it's
not
nothing.
Immediately
and
yeah
like
we
had
a
I,
mean
I,
remember
an
interaction
from
Frederick
that
said
yeah.
We
we
have
all
those
of
t
minus
three
compiles.
For
example,
she
recovered.
That
is
called
very
often.
J
Actually
sorry,
that
was
Alexander
said
that
and
and
we
we
just
we're-
probably
going
to
keep
the
pre
compels
that
accurately
there
in
and
in
gas
in
parity,
as
as
they
are,
we
just
want
to
address
them
as
a
because
as
a
way
to
easily
extend
and
add
some
freaking
piles,
but
we're
not
going
to
be
crazy
and
accept
every
single
pre-compiled
just
because
of
some
rent
or
persons
from
the
internet
needs.
It.
A
A
H
A
H
So,
just
a
just
a
quick
general
update,
I've
been
I've,
asked
everyone
who
took
notes
during
the
1x
meetings
to
share
them
and
I've
collected
I
think
well
definitely
collected
notes
from
several
people.
I
have
my
own
notes
as
well
from
the
first
day,
so
I
know
that
the
video
streams
have
been
published.
I'm
gonna
publish
all
those
notes
publicly
as
well.
H
If,
if
anyone
has
notes
that
haven't
been
shared,
that
would
be
amazing
if
you
could
share
them
with
me
and
I
can
add
them
and
for
the
folks
who
already
gave
me
their
notes.
If,
for
whatever
reason
you
don't
want
them
to
share
publicly
or
if
you
want
them
unattributed
or
something,
then
let
me
know,
but
I
hope
to
do
that
in
the
next
few
days.
A
K
Yeah
so
Vanessa
presented
their
work
on
simulations
I
think
that
their
that
their
group
was
kind
of
working,
primarily
on
focusing
on
on
Uncle,
Ray
and
I.
Like
meant
certain
environmental
conditions
that
arise
and
may
cause
uncle
ray,
they
are
had
aggregated
data
from
the
main
net
through
various
sources
and
ran
some
simulations
and
the
K
framework.
K
So
that
was
a
pretty
pretty
cool
thing
to
see
and
then
on
our
side
we
were
kind
of
working
with
Alexia
on
establishing
a
test
strategy,
a
test
series
or
a
test
plan,
at
least
rather
on
validating
the
hypothesis
and
observing
different
environmental
factors
and
the
effect
on
sink
failure
in
relation
to
the
increasing
state
size.
So,
for
the
past
week,
I
mean
pretty
much
since
I
got
back
from
Stanford.
We've
been
attempting
to
actually
generate
this
large
state
size
within
our
within
the
white
block
framework,
so
I
think
we
agreed.
K
I
was
at
first
I
was
kind
of
unclear
on
what
the
definition
for
state
size
actually
is
what
what?
How
do
we
define
that
specifically
and
what
we
said
was
well,
let's
just
start
out
with
a
count:
let's
try
to
generate
240
200
to
240
million
accounts
within
the
network
on
on
white
block,
so
it's
in
a
controlled
environment.
So
we
kind
of
that's
kind
of
I
mean
we've
generated
thousands
before,
but
never
millions.
K
The
first
was
generating
a
genesis
file
and
then
just
you
know,
bootstrapping
off
that
genesis
file.
That
proved
to
not
work,
and
I
didn't
think
it
would
work
anyway
but
yeah.
So
if
you
do
actually
generate
that,
if
you
can
actually
generate
a
genesis
file,
240
million
accounts
in
it
guess
we'll
cry.
K
If
you
try
to
try
to
point
to
that,
Genesis
block,
so
what
we
ended
up
doing
was
essentially
kind
of
like
an
incremental
counter.
That's
just
generating
random
strings
for
account,
addresses
and
just
sending
transactions
to
those
accounts.
So
we
started
the
new
network
with
a
difficulty
at
0
and
just
multi-threaded
it
so
in
wrote
the
script
and
C++
so
now
we're
about
halfway
there
and
everything
seems
to
be
working,
and
my
math
says
that
we'll
have
that
state
generated
by
Wednesday.
K
So
the
idea
is
that
will
generate
the
state,
save
that
state
as
an
image.
So
that
way
we
can
run
various
tests
repeatedly
within
our
within
the
emulation
platform
and
that'll.
Allow
us
to
like
test
various
environmental
factors.
Conditions.
One
of
the
main
one
of
the
main
hypotheses
was
that
there's
a
correlation
between
bandwidth
and
sync
failure
rate.
K
So
what
we
think
is
that
essentially
there's
a
race
condition
because,
as
the
as
a
new
node
is
bootstrapping
into
the
network
and
syncing,
it's
never
going
to
it's
essentially
never
going
to
catch
up
with
the
actual
state,
because,
as
the
state
size
grows,
pruning
becomes
much
more
aggressive
and
as
that
pruning
becomes
aggressive,
they're
going
to
lose.
There's
going
to
be
like
holes
in
what
they
are
able
to
in
the
state
as
they're
sinking.
K
So
I
kind
of
have
been
documenting
the
entire
process
and
I'll
share
that
later,
but
where
the
plan
is
to
start
actually
testing
this
next
week
and
I'm,
my
team
and
we're
gonna
be
working
with
Alexi
and
Andre
and
kind
of
validating
those
hypotheses
and
taking
it
from
there.
So
we're
gonna
just
start
off
simple
and
observed,
and
with
but
I
have
a
I
have
a
suspicion
that
it's
not
just
bandwidth.
That's
it
would
just
that's.
K
That's
a
simple,
simple
answer:
I
think
that
there's
probably
multiple
conditions
but
will
isolate
each
one
of
them
and
observe
the
effect
so
yeah.
So
that's
where,
where
we're
at
but
yeah
I
got
a
lot
of
the
event,
it
was
really
really
good.
I
mean
I
was
really
tired.
It
was
kind
of
like
being
in
college
again,
but
I
mean
we
were
in
college,
and
everyone
was
talking
for
a
really
long
time.
It
was
nice
cool.
A
L
A
C
M
A
K
I
K
What
you're
saying
here,
I
actually
had
a
lot
of
had
some
issues
figuring
that
out.
I
didn't
really
know
that
right
off
the
bat
yeah
so
like
I
was
getting
some
errors
to
guess,
but
I've
like
never
seen
before.
So
a
pretty
interesting
experience
like
block
lost,
okay,
I've,
never
I've,
never
seen
that
I've
been
working
with,
but
yeah
we
were
getting
some
areas.
I
mean
this
has
been
an
iterative
process,
so
I
mean
there
were
a
few
different
approaches
that
we
took
like.
K
Initially
we
had
several
nodes
and
then
I
found
that
it
was
actually
more
optimal
to
have
less
nodes.
And
then,
after
we
reached
a
certain
point,
it
was
actually
more
optimal
to
have
two
nodes,
because
one
node
can't
be
sending
these
transactions
we're
flooding
it
essentially.
So
it's
it's
harder
for
it
to
actually
send
those
transactions
once
the
difficulty
reaches
a
certain
level
while
simultaneously
mining,
but
still
at
this
point,
as
of
yesterday,
I
I
printed
out
the
data
or
the
stats
and
the
block
time.
The
block
time
was
at
13
seconds.
K
So
it's
getting
a
little
more
difficult,
so
I'm,
anticipating
that
as
time
goes
on.
It's
going
to
take
longer
to
do
this
here.
I'll
share
this
link
in
the
chat
you
can
check
out
the
stats
if
you
want
and
I
also
post
it
a
lot
in
the
this
Twitter
thread,
so
it's
kind
of
like
venom
pretty
so
so
what
I
noticed
is
that
the
process
of
actually
generating
in
a
state
is
kind
of
also
testing
the
hypothesis
as
well,
because
now
I
need
to
have
another
node
sync
on
the
network.
A
A
A
B
B
B
I
A
E
Yeah
we
shift
topics
and
we
just
did
a
release
where
we
reworked
all
the
CLI
and
one
of
the
options
we
added
was
support
for
the
new
corley
test.
That's
so
not
the
old
one,
the
one
that
launched
yesterday
article
started
work
on
fasting,
even
though
that's
an
older
standard,
the
new
1x
standard
isn't
ready
yet
and
whenever
that
happens,.
A
H
K
Awesome
I
wanted
to
say
that
I
won
the
battle
with
the
board
of
directors,
so
we're
gonna
be
open
sourcing
white
Bois,
our
framework
for
testing,
and
that
allows
us
to
do
things
like
you
know:
act
like
the
state
is
large
or
we
can
simulate
or
emulate
network
conditions
or
like
p2p
networks,
and
it's
pretty.
It's
been
pretty
useful
for
one
direct
stuff.
I
think
it's
also
applicable
to
2.0.
K
I
was
speaking
with
maker
L
yesterday,
and
we
were
talking
about
like
helping
out
with
their
client
initiatives
because
they
said
something
about
the
emulation
stuff
yesterday
on
the
call
for
two
dotto
and
we
could
actually
emulate
like
DTP
networks.
So
if
you
don't
have
a
stack
ready,
you
could
actually
test
so
I'd
encourage
anyone
to
to
get
out
to
talk
to
me
if
you,
if
you
want
to
collaborate
or
work
on
that,
so
we're
also
incorporating
like
stuff
like
like
a
kind
of
presenting
like
this
entire
framework
for
development
and
design
and
implementation.
K
That
includes
like
formal
verification
kind
of
like
Petri
net
and
like
state-transition
modeling
and
then
the
idea
is
like
you
come
up
with
a
mathematical
proof.
Formal
verification
for
your
system,
then
you
develop.
Then
you
run
emulations
to
generate
large
data,
sets
that
are
going
to
be
indicative
of
real-world
performance
and
then
based
on
those
data
sets
you
run
simulations,
so
you
can
test
and
validate
performance
before
you.
You
know
ship
anything.
So
I
hope
people
are
excited
about
this
cuz,
it's
cool.
So
in.
A
K
So
we're
not
just
like
dumping
a
codebase
I
want
to
like
we
need
to
write
the
documentation
and
and
do
like
clean
some
stuff
up,
I'm,
rewriting
some
modules
and
rust.
So
any
of
you,
rust,
nerds,
should
just
hit
me
up,
because
I'm
actually
rewriting
some
modules
in
rust
because
they
needed
to
be
rewritten
and
I'm.
Also
I'd
also
want
to
write
thrust
so
and
yeah.
That's
it
just
you
know,
hit
me
up,
so
we
could
emulate
all
that
traffic.
You
can
automate
transactions,
you
can
generate
accounts.
You
can
deploy
your
client.
K
Each
node
exists
within
its
own
private
network,
so
it
has
its
own
IP
address,
so
they're
logically
separated
from
one
another,
so
it
actually
recreates
a
real
world
environment.
So
you
so
when
you
test
within
this
framework,
it's
actually
going
to
it's
highly
accurate
right.
So
it'll
look
here
as
if
I
mean
what
you
see
within
our
testing
environment
is
going
to
be
very
similar
to
what
you
would
see
in
the
real
world.
So
anyone
else
questions
we
don't
need
to
talk
about
this
here.
K
A
O
A
H
Looks
like
he
dropped,
yeah
I
mean
I,
guess
just
very
briefly,
like
we've
been
pretty
focused
on
the
etherium
1x
stuff,
so
I
don't
think
we
have
a
ton
to
report.
The
other
thing
is
benchmarking.
There's
been
some
really
interesting
work
on
benchmarking,
looking
at
life,
which
is
a
very
interesting
compiler
I
think
it's
an
ahead
of
time.
Compiler
written
in
go
just
as
kind
of
candidates,
for
you
know,
I
guess
for
for
for
speeding
up
execution
looking
at
different
options.
B
Cool
all
right,
yeah
I,
also
have
two
more
announcements
by
the
way,
so
the
more
advanced
Lib
cluster
based
buzzer
has
it's
been,
is
now
being
worked
on
again
by
a
guy
from
a
good
point,
grants
crypto
mental.
This
is
get
up
handle
and
also
there
is
another
person
who
has
started
working
on
more
focus,
post
testing
of
solidity,
and
it
is
now
on
the
Google,
open
source
fastest
testing
framework.
J
Just
questions
that
remark
about
apparently
prior
to
fall
stem
there's
need
to
be
a
meeting
that
I
will
not
be
able
to
attend
about
w3m
I
think
it's
called
a
replacement
to
whisper
I,
wanted
to
ask
your
everything
you
or
anybody
from
ferry.
If
there
would
be
some
videos
or
any
notes
tickets
that
meeting
that
would
like
to
have
a
look
at
it.