►
Description
Berlin Ethereum Meetup 2019/07/24
A
Theorem
and
I
realized
that
if
we
can
like
move
the
infrastructure
forward,
a
lot
of
these
things
will
potentially
become
winter
and
I
did
not
care
to
create
or
destroy
my
new
career
with
a
winter.
So
I
really
try
to
address
sort
of
the
question:
how
do
we?
How
do
we
make
it
theorem
1x
work
and
get
to
actual
use
cases?
A
And
so,
since
we've
worked
on
what
we
now
call
mosaic-
and
this
is
a
short
presentation
on
mosaic
1,
which
would
be
the
first
full
map
with
open
validators
on
it
theorem
on
X
but
I'll
get
into
that
throughout
the
talk
see
how
this
works.
So
the
outline
is
very
simple:
I
want
to
say
a
few
words
about
the
theorem
on
X
and
then
I
was
want
to
say
something
about
mosaic.
A
The
numbers
are
a
little
bit
outdated,
but
they
haven't
significantly
changed
so
in
April
last
year,
I
checked
ether
scan
and
roughly
we
do
like
a
hundred
thousand
one
gas
operations,
so
additions
per
second
on
a
theorem
right
now
and
I'm
comparing
apples
with
oranges.
So
all
the
critical
spirits
like
just
bear
with
me
on
this
slide
can
be
very
critical
later,
but
for
every
operation
we
do
in
the
EVM
we
still
have
to
also
execute
eat.
Hash
and
I
ran
at
some
150
terahertz.
A
So
if
you
would
say
like
6000
operations
per
hash,
you
roughly
come
to
like
10
to
the
17
operations,
which
isn't
bad
because
that's
like
world
computer
performance
scale,
but
we
were
wasting
a
lot
of
that
right.
There's
12
orders
of
magnitude
between
the
number
of
operations
we
execute
in
the
AVM
and
the
number
of
cycles
or
operations.
We
do
to
get
proof
of
work,
and
so,
if
you
just
like
take
a
very
standard
thermodynamic
argument,
you
compute,
you
divide
the
useful
part
by
all
the
stuff
done,
which
is
still
ten
to
the
seventeen.
A
A
Why
do
we
pay
this
cost
like?
Why?
Why
do
we
run
the
most
one
of
I
mean
there's
Bitcoin
as
well
but
like?
Why
do
we
run
the
most
inefficient
machine?
I
can
ever
think
of
and
keep
running
it,
and
my
argument
is
that
it
uniquely
builds
a
collective
state.
It
solves
a
problem
that
we
weren't
able
to
solve
before
and
I.
A
Great
projects
but
they're
building
a
new
ecosystem,
a
theorem
2.0,
yes,
but
we've
just
stabilized
phase
zero
and
it
will
take
a
while
before
we
get
to
like
feature
completion
of
what
we
have
today
and
then
the
layer,
2
solutions
always
scale
one
app
at
a
time,
not
a
theorem
1x
itself.
They
don't
aim
to
even
extend
the
interface
and
a
lot
of
them
even
restricts,
what's
possible
to
back
to
you,
TXO
transfers
to
just
token
transfers.
A
So
that's
why
I'm
as
a
ik
is
adapt
to
scale
a
theorem,
1x
itself,
and
so
my
moonshot
challenge
I
mean
they
were
posing
ourselves
but
happy
to
invite
any
it.
Can
we
make
it
theorem
1
X
a
hundred
thousand
times
more
powerful,
more
efficient?
It
will
still
be
near
zero
efficiency.
I
acknowledge
that,
but
it's
already
a
lot
more
power
that
we'd
get
so
that's
the
first
part.
My
short
introduction
of
why
I
think
this
is
worth
trying
and
then
to
introduce
mosaic
itself.
A
A
It
wasn't
an
easy
task.
It
was
also
a
different
task,
so
by
2006
in
a
video
was
that
it's
like
GeForce
8
Series.
So
instead,
this
is
just
a
historical
fact.
I
went
over
to
Wikipedia
earlier
today,
and
so
my
claim
is
or
my
my
position
is,
that
I
mean
we'll
all
agree
that,
like
a
theorem
on
X
right
now
as
sort
of
the
Pentium
and
we're
being
generous
right
like
we
can't
do
that
much
on
a
theorem.
A
A
Actually
I
want
to
make
an
additional
point,
because
we
have
a
bit
of
time,
although
I
I
don't
want
to
make
it
too
long,
because
otherwise
were
here
till
11:00.
I
think
this
analogy
also
really
nicely
illustrates.
Sort
of
how
the
design
philosophy
is
different,
like
that's
for
ATM
2.0,
don't
have
to
care
about
which
shard
they're
executing
on
which
is
somewhat
similar
to
a
multi-core
processor.
A
Whereas
if
you
want
a
quote
for
a
GPU,
you
have
to
explicitly
write
your
DAP
for
being
able
or
your
program
to
be
able
to
use
the
video
card,
capabilities
and
I
think
this
is
somewhat
similar
to
what
I'll
explain
here.
If
you
want
to
write
your
adapt
to
use
mosaic
as
a
DAP
you'll
have
to
ride
additional
contracts,
but
it
might
be
worth
for
some
use
cases,
and
so
so
my
claim
is:
if
it
theorem
is
the
world's
computer
CPU,
then
mosaic
is
a
GPU.
A
You
connect
to
accelerate
your
computations,
and
so
what
is
the
blockchain
right?
Like
a
blockchain
has
two
parts:
it
has
a
supply
side
and
a
demand
side
because
it
needs
to
be
in
economic
equilibrium.
The
whole
point
is
that
no
one
is
this
is
doing
this
for
for
generosity.
It's
a
for
profit
motive
to
run
a
validator.
A
A
A
So
these
boxes
are
like
representations
of
contracts
on
a
theorem,
and
so
a
validator
joins
a
specific
core.
So
one
of
them
by
by
depositing
both
eat
and
OSD
on
a
theorem
and
initially
somewhat
connects
to
the
previous
talk.
So
you
you
need
to
earn
reputation
throughout
your
life
as
a
validator,
and
we
already
the
steak
itself
helps.
A
A
So
plasma
is
based
on
fraud
proofs
right,
so
you
can
only
do
certain
stage
transitions
within
plasma
and
then,
if
any
invalid
transition
would
happen
on
the
plasma
chain.
Now
you
need
to
report
the
fraud
proof
on
Ani
theorem
and
then
people
can
exit
bla
bla
here
its
traditional
consensus
engine.
So
so
I
call
this
a
meta
block
and
a
meta
block
chain,
because
the
idea
is
really
just
reimplemented,
a
consensus
engine
add
layer,
two
and
so
the
finalization
a
block
is
a
Byzantine
vote
of
the
validators
on
a
theorem.
Okay.
A
I
would
love
to
have
this
conversation,
but
I.
Don't
I'm
not
aware
of
any
well
I'm
aware
of
some
people
working
towards
like
full
EVM
capability
on
a
plasma
chain
like
leap,
Tao
and
so
leave,
and
any
very
good
friends
with
you
on
but
I'm,
not
aware
of
like
them
having
a
fully
VM
interface
I'm
working
with.
B
C
A
So
I
mean
the
reason
I,
like
the
GPU
analogy,
is
because,
if
you
think
of
your
old
desktop,
it's
a
card
you
plug
into
it,
and
so
the
same
here
like
it's
a
set
of
contracts.
We
deploy
and
then
build
out
a
validator
pool
and
a
demand
side
for
it,
but
anyone
can
take
the
same
contracts
and
deploy
them
with
their
own
group
like
it.
You
can
deploy
multiple
instances
of
this
on
a
theorem,
a
net,
no
one's
stopping
you
right.
B
A
A
So
next
slide
so
as
soon
as
you
sort
of
well,
if
you
join
on
a
theorem
as
a
validator,
there's
a
concept
of
meta
block
opening
which
I
won't
go
into
detail
because
I
wanted
to
sort
of
paint
the
big
picture.
But
just
if
you
would
take
the
quote
like
from
the
next
meta
block,
it
has
a
specific
meaning.
A
Then
the
validator
needs
to
join
on
this
auxiliary
system
and
on
this
auxiliary
system
he
needs
to
play
Casper
FFG,
so
why
we
want
to
do.
That
is
because
we
don't
want
to
expend
new
proof-of-work
or
have
other
algorithms.
We
just
want
to
have
a
way
to
finalize
chain
history
based
on
any
block
proposer
mechanism,
but
more
detail.
We
actually
play
this
twice.
A
But
now
I
don't
know.
Do
people
want
me
to
explain
it
Kaspar
effigy
a
bit
or
yes,
alright,
so
Casper
FFG
works
by
finalizing
a
history
after
it's
been
published
right
so
with
tournament,
every
block
is
only
committed
if
it
has
a
supermajority
of
two
rounds
from
the
validators
with
Casper
FFG.
The
original
gadget
was
also
to
like
take
away
the
economic
finality
of
proof-of-work,
so
we
don't
really
care
anymore
about
which
blocks
are
produced.
A
We
still
want
to
have
some
noise
reduction,
of
course,
but
once
the
blocks
exist
now
we're
going
to
cast
specific
vote
messages
that
need
to
and
they're
of
the
form
where
you
identify
a
source
and
a
target,
and
so
as
soon
as
and
then
there's
specific
rules.
So
the
construction
is
such
that
there
are
specific
rules
that
you
can
prove
certain
properties
of
these
checkpoints.
A
So
we
can
easily
slash
you
on
a
theorem
1
X
immediately
as
soon
as
you
try
to
finalize
contradicting
histories
on
the
auxilary
system
as
well,
because
the
vote
message
themselves
are
very
clean
and
we
know
that
if
they
exist
you're
accountable
for
it
as
a
validator.
So
if
you
see
a
history
of
supermajority
vote
messages
finalizing
a
certain
history
now
you
know
that
this
history
is
finalized.
I
mean
it's
a
little
bit
more
complicated
than
that,
but
that's
sort
of
the
the
basics
I
hope
I
got
that
right.
A
But
what
is
really
nice
now
is
that
we
have
a
really
good
noise
reduction
mechanism
right,
because
on
this
exhilaration
the
validators
are
playing
Caspar
FFG
to
finalize
a
history,
and
now
it
takes
a
very
specific
form
to
bring
back
to
et
remain
that
to
say,
like
you
know
what
this
is
our
proposal
of
what
has
happened
and
it's
we
propose.
That
is
a
valid
finalization
of
the
axillary
system.
A
It's
now
a
very
condensed
format,
and
so
we
can
present
this
to
this
core
contract
and
if
it's
indeed
valid
like
if
it's
satisfied
all
the
constraints
of
Casper
FFG
now
we
know
that
least
these
validators
of
this
score
have
a
supermajority
for
it
and
if
no
one
got
slashed,
there
wasn't
a
contradicting
history,
but
that's
not
enough,
because
we
don't
want
to
weaken
our
security.
So
imagine
that
you
now
know
don't
have
one
core,
but
a
thousand.
A
You
now
need
to
divide
your
validators
over
those
thousand
course
and
then
I
get
a
thousand
times
less
steak
representing
any
finalization.
So
we
want
to
make
sure
that
the
total
stake
in
this
chip
I.
Think
of
it
as
a
chip.
Now
these
days
but
like
in
this
table,
is
securing
any
of
the
course
and
I've
been
neglecting
the
side
of
the
room.
A
I
realize
sorry,
and
so
that's
why
we
in
will
we
introduce
a
committee,
but
in
some
sense
you
can
think
of
it
as
a
very
as
a
traditional
blockchain
system
right
you,
some
leader,
needs
to
propose
a
block,
and
that
is
happening
on
the
auxiliary
system
with
the
finalization
of
the
side
chain
any
finalized.
Any
segments
on
the
auxiliary
system
that
is
finalized
is
a
valid
proposal.
A
Oh,
how
we
committed
is,
by
in
the
near
future,
selecting
a
random
committee
from
all
validators
that
now
need
to
do
a
couple
of
things,
and
so
it's
important
that
that
they're
randomly
selected
from
all
right,
because
we
want
to
have
scalability
if
we
would
just
ask
all
million
validators
to
validate
this
transition
of
one
core,
it
wouldn't
work.
If
we
would
rely
just
on
the
core
validators,
it
would
be
weaken
security.
A
So
we
want
to
randomly
reselect
from
all
validators
now
to
be
in
this
committee
contract,
to
evaluate
this
block
proposal
and
in
order
to
successful
dude
on
these
committee
members,
they
must
be
able
to
get
the
previous
state
of
the
core
that
was
committed.
So
the
previous
commit
which
might
be
like
a
day
old.
We
called
need
to
be
able
to
get
the
snapshot
of
that
state
database,
and
then
they
need
to
be
able
to
get
all
the
transactions
that
are
proposed.
State
transition
in
this
meta
block,
and
then
what
is
important.
A
They
need
to
prove
that
they
recomputed
the
full
state
transition,
because
otherwise
they
would
just
be
lazy
and
they
would
wait
for
someone
to
show
up
with
the
result,
and
now
they
were
just
like
vote
with
whomever
has
done
the
work.
So
we
need
to
make
sure
that
in
the
committee
contract
they
also
need
to
prove
that
they
did
the
work,
namely
get
the
old
states
recompute
the
state
transition
and
then
show
that
proof
that
they
did
the
work.
A
And
then
it
gets
very
interesting
because
the
data
availability
problem
is
a
really
tough
problem,
because
it
is
subjective
whether
or
not
I
get.
The
data
is
a
subjective
question.
I
might
just
have
a
lagging
internet
connection
or
the
data
might
be
being
withheld
from
me.
So
it's
it's
it's
very
hard
to
quantify
that,
and
but
here
we
try
to
make
an
approximation
to
that,
because
we're
saying
that
this
new
newly
selected
committee
in
the
future
has
to
be
able
to
get
the
old
data
and
recompute
it.
And
so
that's
some
approximation
of
the
question.
A
The
reason
that
the
data
availability
problem
is
really
hard
is
because
it
theorem
is,
like
we
said,
a
Pentium
one
processor,
so
I
can't
do
a
lot
and
if
we
would
ask
it
to
reevaluate
all
the
data
we
wouldn't
get
scalability,
but
if
there
would
be
a
corrupt
majority
in
the
core,
then
they're,
obviously
not
going
to
present
the
bad
data
that
they
want
to
get
committed.
So
you
do
need
to
address
sort
of
an
approximation
of
the
data
availability
and
and,
like
I
sort
of
said,
with
the
committee
formation.
That's
randomly
selected.
A
We
we've
evaluated
again
the
whole
stake
that
was
present
in
in
the
contract
and
we
can
support
up
to
ten
or
a
hundred
thousand
validators.
Roughly.
We
aim
to
have
like
a
hundred
perk
or
but
of
course,
this
depends
on
demand,
if
no
one's
using
it
there's
no
transactions
fees
paying
for
Valladares
and
it's
not
going
to
grow,
and
so
a
last
point
and
I'll
get
like
back
to
higher
level
stuff.
And
if
there's
questions
also,
of
course,
this
wouldn't
work.
A
Casper
FFG
speed
its
own
history,
and
it
knows
that
eventually,
if
it
needs
to,
it
eventually
will
be
held
responsible
by
a
committee
for
any
of
the
votes.
At
any
point,
those
votes
can
be
brought
to
to
the
committee
contract
and
they
will
be
held
responsible
and
in
a
last
point,
so
we've
established
sort
of
an
extension
of
a
team,
and
now
we
want
to
be
able
to
transfer
information
between
the
two.
So
we
have
a
concept
of
message:
boxes,
there's
an
outbox
and
an
inbox
on
both
sides.
A
But
if
you
have
an
out
box
on
a
theorem
1x,
you
can
put
a
message
into
that
and
then
every
time
information
like
or
consensus
goes
either
way.
Now
you
can
improve
all
the
messages
that
are
in
the
outbox
and
send
them
to
and
copy
them
in
the
inbox,
and
so
that
can
be
used
for
transfer,
locking
up
tokens
and
re
minting
them
on
the
other
side
and
relieving
a
nonce
taking
the
same
way
or
any
stateful
information.
You
can
pass
true
to
this
message
box.
A
A
You
can
either
work
on
the
EVM
interface
and
then
you
definitely
need
to
talk
to
us
because
it's
still
a
bit
rough
and
all
the
code
is
and
like
get
up.
Ost,
open,
SC,
sorry,
but,
like
I,
said,
we
sort
of
wanted
to
make
sure
that
they
were
real
uses.
So
we've
also
further
polished
this
and
for
web
2
applications.
And
if
you
go
to
platform
OST
comm,
it
uses
all
the
underlying
architecture-
and
you
just
have
to
like
click
through
web
pages
to
to
use
it.
A
But
it
uses
like
a
contract
framework
that
we
call
open
St.
It
has
a
noncustodial
wallet
for
iOS
and
Android,
and
then
we
have
build
a
real
layer
service,
so
meta
transactions
to
contract
wallets
that
you
can
implement
in
your
own
app
to
make
transactions
happen
on
mosaic,
0
right
now,
and
also
anything
that's
on
mosaics.
A
0
will
will
automatically
move
to
mosaic
1
when
it
launches
and
then
mosaic
1
is
what
we're
actively
working
on
you'll
sort
of
notice
that
this
is
a
little
bit
bare
minimum,
like
my
slides,
are
black
and
white
and
it's
somewhat
deliberate
because
as
a
company,
we
want
to
build
the
demand
side.
So
we
have
this.
If
you
go
to
platform
nord-ost,
it's
all
polished
and
documented,
etc,
and
we
think
that's
important
to
get
like
web
2.
Applications
on
board.
A
A
If
you
want
to
discuss
you
can
join
there
and
then
so,
for
example,
what
have
we
already
built?
So
we
have
one
application
that
is
on
a
theory
minute
with
mosaic,
zero
and
they're
now
rolling
out
to
like
beat
the
users.
So
it's
beta
users
of
the
application
with
real
aetherium
tokens
and
they
had
an
internal
point
system
that
they
called
hornet,
because
the
app
was
called
hornet
and
the
app
is
a
gay
dating
app
by
the
way.
A
So
people
using
this
app
have
absolutely
no
interest
in
it
theorem
or
cryptocurrencies
they're
there
to
find
guys,
but
they
sort
of
have
this
internal
community.
So
if
you
translate
or
report
bugs
or
moderate,
you
earn
points
and
that's
where
we
started,
so
we
transform
those
points
internal
to
the
app
to
LGBT
tokens,
and
so
right
now
it's
a
very
limited
use
case,
but
it
helps
us
stay
within
legal
constraints,
plus
also
test
the
technology,
because
the
app
itself
has
like
30
million
downloads.
We
have
12,000
beta
users
and
we're
slowly
rolling
it
out.
A
So
in
a
week
we
have
well
it's
a
week
and
a
half
now
so
we're
at
seven
hundred
I
will
keep
pushing
that
up
to
a
few
thousand.
But
this
was
the
whole
idea
for
us.
This
was
like,
let's
make
sure
that
a
theorem
is
used
for
real
use
cases,
and
that
means
that
people
who
don't
know
about
the
theorem
can
use
it,
and
that
means
that
it
also
needs
to
be
really
really
easy.
A
So
where
we
do
put
a
lot
of
our
company
focus
is
making
this
UX
really
easy,
and
so
what
we
developed,
for
example,
is
a
smart
contract
wallet
non-custodial
that
lives
in
your
phone,
but
you
can
recover
the
pin
if
you
lose
all
your
device.
If
you
lose
all
your
devices,
you
can
recover
access
to
the
contract
in
a
noncustodial
way,
with
just
six
digit
in
six
twelve
hours.
So
there's
a
delayed
function
on
the
contract
and
it's
a
different
talk.
A
But
but
it
was
very
important
for
us
that
people
who
don't
know
about
the
theorem
don't
have
to
go,
write
down
twelve
words
in
order
to
use
this,
because
then
there
will
never
be
adoption
of
the
technology
and
so
that's
sort
of
as
a
as
a
as
a
little
bit
of
a
self-promotion
here.
The
last
slide
Thanks.