Looking for a better solution of problems that do not imply a measurable definition of "better" or "solution" is pointless (is there free will?). Having a satisfactory answer is enough, describing possible answers is good, arguing over better answers is silly

I'm going to RWC to annoy MPC and FHE people by telling them how TEEs are better and annoying TEE people (if I see any) by telling them how MPC is better. That is right, I said MPC

I am skeptical about learning from AI and reading papers with AI. It makes mistakes, and not the kind of mistakes people make. If you verify the output, then it can be useful, but verifying cancels out the efficiency benefit. Good thing I don't mind being inefficient.

be careful what you wish for, lest it come true

It was such an energy boost to see all these happy sleep deprived people presenting their projects they built from scratch in a couple of days

Trust doesn't evaporate; when we make something trustless, we assume trust somewhere else. It is good to be aware where the trust assumptions live

And then these snarks get even further away from each other being separated by domains and tooling around them We need runtime trade-offs programmability with a simple stable interface that we can build against

I find it curious how mechanism design - a field of statements about human behaviour and incentives - doesn't imply studying psychology but only economics, game theory, and such. Human interaction is the foundation of everything. Understanding each other is something to learn

Game theory is psychology stripped of humanity

How much time do you think will pass between quantum computers becoming strong enough to wreck modern cryptography in a meaningful way and people learning about this?

Optimistic privacy

Who certainly isn't gonna suffer from the carefree adoption of vibe coding for production code is bug bounty hunters

I love this thread