Creater of ethereum

It takes less than 60 seconds, and it really makes a difference in helping to convince hard-to-get guests. I also love reading the reviews! For show notes and past guests, please visit tim. For transcripts of episodes, go to tim. Follow Tim:Twitter: twitter. All opinions are mine alone. There are risks involved in placing any investment in securities or in Bitcoin. None of the information presented today is intended to form the basis for any offer or recommendation or have any regard to the investment objectives, financial situation, or needs of any specific person.

БС Максим Дорофеев: Джедай 5-ого уровня и его тараканы. БС6 Максим Дорофеев: Как сдружиться с внутренней обезьянкой? Дизайн-мышление: почему нам нужно быть креативными? Саммари на нон-фикшн-книги. Обзор ведущих сервисов. Дмитрий Чернышев. Модель образования, когда мы запираем малыша в школе на 11 лет, не устраивает ни малышей, ни родителей, ни учителей.

Как говорить с кем угодно, когда угодно и где угодно - Ларри Кинг - короткое содержание. Будущее самых пострадавших индустрий — путешествия, рестораны, спорт. Storytel: 15 миллионов подписчиков в России? Интервью с Борисом Макаренковым, управляющим Storytel в Рф. Сумеет ли AI писать книжки и готовить саммари? Интервью с создателем Briefly Алексеем Скрипником. Кто такие удачные люди? Осмысляем надоевший культ. Тимоти Феррис. Введите вашу электронную почту и читайте эту и еще книжек.

Оцените книжку. о аудиокниге. Подробная информация. Саморазвитие, личностный рост. Стартапы и создание бизнеса. Tim Ferris. Бесплатный контент. Создатель книжки. Остальные аудиокниги создателя. Выборки с данной нам книжкой. Как работать эффективно: дайджест подкастов.

Книжки, похожие на « Vitalik Buterin, Creator of Никита Маклахов. Buterin said it is this"second stage" that the paper will discuss,. Бутерин произнес, что это- « 2-ая стадия », которая будет дискуссироваться в договоре,. Ethereum creator Vitalik Buterin described in a blog post on Tuesday how.

Создатель Ethereum Виталик Бутерин обрисовал в блоге во вторник, как. На Ethereum конференции Devcon, создатель проекта Виталик Бутерин , объявил,. Основоположник Ethereum Виталик Бутерин в собственном новеньком заявлении объявил, что мощность смарт- контрактов. Speaking on Twitter this morning, Buterin publicly declined comment on the recent exploit, stating.

Говоря в Twitter сейчас днем, Бутерин на публике отказался откомментировать недавний эксплойт, заявив. At the ethereum community conference EthCC. На конференции ethereum общества EthCC в. Париже в пятницу основоположник ethereum Виталик Бутерин представил решение …. Perhaps most notably, however,. Важно то,. On the sidelines of the St Petersburg International Economic. На полях Петербургского интернационального экономического. For example, in February this year, Vitalik Buterin , the creator of the Etherium platform and cryptocurrency,.

К примеру, в феврале этого года Виталик Бутерин , создатель платформы и криптовалюты Ethereum,. During a core developer meeting today,. Во время встречи разрабов сейчас,. During an interview with TechCrunch, Buterin emphasized that although the cryptocurrency market has demonstrated.

Во время интервью с TechCrunch Бутерин выделил, что, хотя криптовалютный рынок. But, as Augur co-founder Joey Krug noted, there are not enough developers working on the core protocol of Ethereum and consequently,. Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin stated that fully scaling Ethereum could take two to five years.

Но, как отметил один из соучредителей компании Augur Joey Krug, недостаточно разрабов, работающих над главным протоколом Ethereum,. The statement of Buterin came after several experts in the cryptocurrency sector including. Augur co-founder Joey Krug said that there is a clear lack of developers working on scaling solutions for the Ethereum network.

Заявление Бутерина возникло опосля того, как несколько профессионалов в секторе криптовалюты, включая. Opened by ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin last year,. Результатов: 27 , Время: 0. Buterin на различных языках мира.

Ethereum creater of обмен валюты кирова

Вопрос моему p2p crypto trading гнева автора

He stepped down as Decentral CEO in September , and, according to Russo, has since shifted his focus into the health and wellness space. The latter had dropped out of his computer science degree and then dabbled in real estate in the years prior to , when—like nearly all the other founders—he began to doubt the traditional finance system.

He got into Bitcoin, and, at the time he met Buterin, was working with Israeli startup Colored Coins, a project to manage real-world assets as tokens on top of the Bitcoin network. Buterin also worked on the project before he came up with Ethereum; in December , he asked Chetrit to join him.

Charles Hoskinson wanted to be a mathematician, before becoming disillusioned with the profession and taking an increasing interest in Bitcoin. Born in Hawaii, and raised in Colorado, Hoskinson already had experience of raising money for an early version of a decentralized exchange when he was introduced to Ethereum, and Buterin, by Anthony Di Iorio. He became one of the original five Ethereum co-founders, and was named CEO in December —taking a leading role in setting up the Swiss Foundation, and its legal framework.

Hoskinson was an early advocate of Ethereum as a pro-profit corporation, which chimed badly with many of the others, and ultimately led to his departure. In tandem, he launched Cardano , which has risen to become the sixth biggest cryptocurrency by market cap, since the rollout of a major new blockchain upgrade earlier this month. He met the first five co-founders in Miami, just before the North American Bitcoin conference in January , where Ethereum was due to be unveiled.

After being the first to get an Ethereum testnet up and running, he demanded a place at the top table. The others agreed, but not without some pushback. Wood continued to work on the Ethereum code, via Parity, the company he founded with his partner Jutta Steiner. But now he is solely focussed on the Web3 Foundation , and its interoperability blockchain project Polkadot —a competitor to Ethereum. He was added to the founders roster alongside Gavin Wood in early But each, being unaware of the other, had worked separately.

Having two implementations later turned out to be fortuitous: there would always be a backup. Worst dad award goes to But, after the controversial hard fork, a series of hacks, and the birth of his son, Wilcke handed the supervision of Geth over to his right-hand man Peter Szilagyi. At the end of last year, he hinted at the frustrations that had caused him to quit.

Now, with his brother Joey, he has a games development studio, Grid Games, and recently put some of the ether he received from Ethereum up for sale to fund development. Grid Games has now begun recruiting developers. The most experienced of the eight founders, Joseph Lubin graduated in electrical engineering and computer science from Princeton in A diverse career in software engineering, music producing, business and finance followed before Lubin became interested in crypto and made contact with fellow-Canadian Di Iorio through the Bitcoin Alliance of Canada.

Later, he was introduced to Buterin, and was asked to join the group of co-founders. And so the capacity of the whole system increases by a factor of four, right? And so, we actually expect that capacity to increase going even far beyond , over the next couple of decades —. I mean, to give it a comparable metric. They can actually be arbitrary computer programs running on the side. So then I think the question comes up, well, where is it?

A lot of people I know who are building apps on top of ETH have now had to come up with backup plans. There are competitive blockchains that are coming up, which trade-off decentralization security for speed. Can we reliably target a date for certain kinds of improvements, because people are betting their businesses on this. Vitalik Buterin: Great and very important question.

The Eth2 chain is already running, right? It does not yet have sharding, but the proof-of-stake system is running. The thing that has not yet happened is the event that we call the merge, which is where we basically actually take the existing activity on Ethereum and we fully move it over from the proof-of-work chain to the proof-of-stake chain.

And then the proof-of-work changes, basically becomes irrelevant from there. The reason why we took this multi-step approach, where we first start the proof-of-stake system, and then we let both run in parallel for some time and then we merge at the end is just to give proof-of-stake sometime to prove itself before the entire ecosystem is asked to upgrade over.

But basically, the proof-of-stake thing exists, has been stable, running ever since the launch and at some point fairly soon, we are going to actually go and merge all of the proof-of-work activity onto it. So sharding is also going to happen. I will admit that we were actually prioritizing the merge even more than sharding recently. The reason why for this actually has to do with the other thing, which is rollups, right?

The thing to remember is that if you have rollups, but you do not have sharding, you still have X factor scaling, right? You still have the ability for the blockchain to go up to somewhere between 1, and 4, transactions a second, depending on how complex these transactions are. And so with rollups, as I mentioned, the optimism, fully EVM capable rollup is likely to launch, an initial being that release in around a month or so.

There was actually simpler rollups that are only capable of processing simple transactions that are exchanging between assets unlike Loopring, and zkSync. And those rollups have already been running stably for about a year, right? Vitalik Buterin: Yeah, I think so. I mean, possibly even nonfinancial applications like the Nifties, and domain names and so forth, to start off just because the risks are lower if things do break and then creeping up to higher and higher value things as people become more comfortable over time.

Naval Ravikant: So do you think that Ethereum could have a scaling schism, like Bitcoin did? Bitcoin split famously into Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash, or the block size debate a few years back, which is all around scaling and some people were saying Bitcoin should be digital cash and so therefore, it needs these big blocks and it needs to handle more transactions. And other people said, no, no, Bitcoin is a Swiss bank account. And lots of small nodes have to be able to run it.

So we care more about security than we do about handling small transactions and the small block people won. And so Bitcoin forked. And now of course, what we call Bitcoin is a small block Bitcoin that won that debate. Vitalik Buterin: I think so, except I do think that the risks are much lower. And I mean, Ethereum did already have this schism, right?

Of Ethereum and Ethereum Classic. And so, why stay on the chain where the core developers and lots of people are eagerly expecting a proof-of-stake change if you can just move on to a platform already that accepts your values? So I think that was one of the factors that did actually end up making the Eth2 transition a bit more secure. I think in Ethereum, everyone is roughly on board with the idea that you have some layer 1 scaling and you have some layer 2 scaling.

There are some longer term disagreements like Justin Drake, one of our researchers for example, is much more into making layer 1 more powerful, whereas I am more in favor of a simpler layer 1 and having layer 2 do more things. Has that happened yet? Has there been a case where something has been implemented into Ethereum that the community or the other developers wanted, which you disagreed with? And then where I just kept completely silent.

So block reward decreases, for example, I was completely silent or mostly silent. ProgPow was mostly silent. It was obvious that the ProgPower side was losing. Things that I was trying to push forward. Are you running the Ethereum Foundation? Or are you just a roving individual with a laptop and a few friends who just writes blog posts and submits proposals?

Vitalik Buterin: Some of both. And I do the proposal submitting, I do some writing proof of concepts and in Python, I do some trying to coordinate people. The Ethereum Foundation as an organization exists. So the executive director of that is Aya Miyaguchi. She has been doing a lot of the logistical things for about the past three years and has done an amazing job. And, I ended up coordinating and working with her quite a lot on various things. There is a lot of proposals that got initiated on the outside.

There was a lot of proposals that got a really huge amount of community support coming from the outside. Even organizations other than the Ethereum Foundation that have a lot of resources within the Ethereum ecosystem. So, and I think in practice, it does end up being this loose collaborative effort between a lot of different groups. Naval Ravikant: So Uniswap is interesting.

And so this shows how the Ethereum ecosystem is very different than the Bitcoin ecosystem. How many tokens are they going to be? Vitalik Buterin: No, this is definitely a very important topic. On the other hand, fire is crucial to human civilization, but on the other hand, fire is very evil. So the thing with tokens, right, is that the crypto is, space is not the only space that tried to build decentralized things, right? There were a lot of decentralized projects that are outside the crypto space, like Diaspora, the decentralized alternative to Facebook that people tried to build around , is one good example.

You can get idealists, but the problem with idealism is that idealism is not very socially scalable. And so cryptocurrency, on the other hand, can appeal to universal values, right? Where the real universal value is getting rich for a lot of people.

And I think that balance is important, right? I think the failure of a lot of non-blockchain crypto shows the inability to do things at scale without that financial incentive. But at the same time, a lot of the more, at least in my opinion, a moral project within crypto that just care about the pump and the volume and getting a powerful and expensive token that they can get rich off of.

Those projects end up not really doing well in the long term either. And so, I think a lot of people end up stumbling and falling on that to some extent. So, crypto, yeah. Naval Ravikant: I was going to say, I think some of that is just driven by the pre-mine phenomenon where Bitcoin had a so-called fair launch, although you can debate how fair it was, but how fair the distribution is today.

But everyone started mining at the same time or everyone who was aware of it. Whereas a lot of coins that have come subsequently, the team has a pre-mine where they get a bunch of the coin in advance. There was a pre-mine but no, the pre-mine was only about 12 percent, actually about 10 percent of the total supply. And people did have the opportunity to mine or to get by in the sale. And so a lot of people had the opportunity to become part of the ecosystem. But I do think that the less monetary, the movement aspect of this is important, right?

So I think that there definitely is this complicated balance between different factors. Basically the coin can help, but too much emphasis on just a coin can hurt. That it was reactionary. That it was reacting to SushiSwap, trying to swoop in and, basically try to push everyone to quickly migrate over and they had a coin.

And so people got into SushiSwap because they just wanted to get rich off of it. And so Uniswap reacted by making their own coin. Basically, if you had used the UniSwap even once before the airdrop, how it began, you would get UNI tokens. So the joke was Uniswap actually delivered on giving everyone a stimulus check. And people really loved that.

And the supply distribution of UNI was very widely dispersed, and the whole thing was this DAO where a lot of people could participate in decision-making. The backdrop on SushiSwap is Uniswap was this automated market maker, this decentralized exchange that launched and then they got attacked. They got cloned by this other one called SushiSwap.

Joke on UNI Sushi. And we were just really confused because it seemed like there was this one brilliant technical guy surrounded by 15 other people who all had the title co-founder and it was very confusing to evaluate as an investor. So we ended up not investing, to our detriment. Tim Ferriss: Naval, let me jump in for one second here, if I may ask a naive question, a novice question maybe. Thinking of Ethereum and comparing it to, say, Bitcoin and considering the possible regulatory threats to Bitcoin and I think probably a stronger focus on cryptocurrency than blockchain by regulators.

And then AWS, that even if there were a crackdown on currencies, that Ethereum would have some resilience and antifragility in that respect. Does it mean that Ethereum in its entirety is less subject to regulatory threat, or that it can thrive in the face of regulatory threat along the lines of that which Bitcoin could face?

Vitalik Buterin: Comparing the regulatory situation of Ethereum and Bitcoin, I think both benefit from being highly international, right. Bitcoin has a strong community in the US, it has a strong community in China. It has a strong community in the EU and lots of other places. Ethereum is very similar in that regard. In other words, these very strong communities in lots of different countries, including countries that are not geopolitically on the same page with each other.

The reality is that regulators have cracked down on cryptocurrency significantly less than they theoretically could, right. They theoretically could make something like Coinbase illegal overnight. There are even regulators that want to use public blockchains and even things like Ethereum to build applications on top of them.

They see value in some of the advantages that the things like stablecoins for example, could provide and non-financial applications of various kinds. Cryptocurrencies are inherently designed to be sovereign resistant, right. And so the geographic redundancy is one aspect of it. And some countries try to ban it. I think for a while, people think China tried to ban it and that failed.

And right now, India is talking about banning it and that will end in tears, right. For example, going to proof-of-stake is a different kind of redundancy than being just all proof-of-work. Proof-of-work is you shut down miners and miners of hardware and equipment, where they live, right. They need a physical presence, whereas proof-of-stake as validators, we just need an internet connection.

And then you also have just what applications are running on top of these platforms? And I actually think eventually, all internet traffic will be encrypted and all of it will require cryptocurrencies to just allocate scarce resources. Even today, there are things that we do on the internet that are centralized, like caching and routing and spam filtering, that should be decentralized and involve crypto payments for efficiency.

And so if you take away value transfer from the internet, the internet as we know it will be stunted at best and more likely to cease to function at some levels. Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, not at all. Just coming back to Ethereum for a second. And with digital gold, high price is good. You want your gold to go up in value, except to the extent these days digital gold, Bitcoin, has been going up but it actually gives me some trepidation. This thing will get inflated.

ETH may end up being more valuable. Do you have a — what is your current point of view on where the ETH supply heads and what the ETH price means for the ecosystem? Vitalik Buterin: Yeah. It would just literally get deleted out of existence. And so if demands to use Ethereum is high enough, then there would actually be more ETH being destroyed than is being created. And so the joke that I would sometimes make is, if Bitcoin knows if fixed supply is sound money, then if you have a decreasing supply, does that make us some ultrasound money?

If you look at the transaction fees for the last month, they actually have been on a lot of days greater than the block rewards for that day. At the beginning, the way that ETH was even described when we were doing the sale, is that this is like gas. And if the token is actually a consumable, right, then it actually behaves even more like — well, I guess gasoline, as the original metaphor, right.

If people want to use it, they would actually have to consume it. And so ETH — the value of it is actually something that depends on the Ethereum network being useful. It has to exist. Bitcoin, the value is in the currency or in the Bitcoin itself. Naval Ravikant: And trusted third parties are security holes. Naval Ravikant: One of the things to think about here — and I think you care about this more than most people in crypto, which is nice, is that you do seem to care about wealth inequality, the Gini coefficient, and the distribution of coins.

And how do you think about the distribution of wealth in a crypto run economy as opposed to a fiat currency, aka the US dollar and the Euro run economy? Vitalik Buterin: This is definitely, I think, one of the challenging questions for the community to grapple with. Sure, okay. And then Tornado Cash had an airdrop a couple of weeks back. And I think that kind of churn is healthy. Fiat currency is — they basically get created by a combination of the central bank and the commercial banking ecosystem.

And in terms of where the newly generated value comes in, both sides of that get some share essentially. I know this is a controversial position along the libertarians, but I actually like the idea that if you have a fiat currency, then the government can print it and just use that as a source of government revenue. The reason why I like it is because I think if the governments could get money through unobtrusive means, that reduces the extents to which it has to rely on getting money through more intrusive means and rely on taxation and more direct —.

Naval Ravikant: And these taxes have to be collected now, whereas printing can kick the can down the road for the next person to solve. Vitalik Buterin: Right, the nice thing about cryptocurrency of course, is that the ecosystem is much more transparent. And within the context of a crypto ecosystem, as I mentioned, you can still do very egalitarian things.

You can still reward people who were very important early contributors to things that ended up being very important. You could still do all of those things. You can tell what the money supply of ETH is at any given point, good luck doing that with the US dollar money supply.

Or you can tell what the inflation on ETH is at any given point. And so in that sense, this and run-up seem a little different to me than the run-up, which was based on just a lot of hype, frankly. And we could spend a whole podcast on that but just at a very high level, you had a really good post on your blog saying Endnotes on And it was about a lot more than just crypto. What else are you really interested in these days? Is it AGI? Is it life extension?

Is it public goods? Is it different kinds of voting schemes? Vitalik Buterin: Some of all of those. I think the changing way in which economics works is definitely one of those really important topics, right. One of them that I talked about is just public goods becoming more important, right. And so scientific research is one example of a public good. My blog is one example of a public good. Open source software is an example of a public good.

And on the internet, public goods are even more common than private goods are. And so our economics just has to just take that fact seriously. Naval Ravikant: Basically, these public goods are aware that the costs are concentrated. If I want to fund scientific research, I do it out of my own pocket, but it benefits all of humanity.

The benefits are distributed. Naval Ravikant: And so these tend to be undersupplied. There tend to be too few of them. Naval Ravikant: And so there are schemes out there to tackle some of them. Vitalik Buterin: Quadratic funding is this interesting mechanism that basically says anyone can donate money to public goods through the mechanism but to compensate for this under provision that you talk about, the mechanism provides a subsidy to every public good.

And that subsidy depends not just on the amount that was contributed but also on the total number of people who contributed, right. And the tragedy of the commons on the second one, is, much greater, right. Tim Ferriss: There are other plausible explanations but those largely hinge on named names versus them being anonymous.

First of all, in quadratic funding, unfortunately, you do need to have some kind of model for identity because you need to prevent the two people from just pretending that they are people. Vitalik Buterin: But with cryptography, you actually can do fancy things that give you most of the benefit from having anonymity, despite needing to have an identity system.

Basically, you can have a system where people can make all these contributions and they are done in such a way that the system identifies how many unique contributors there are for each project but where the system does not get an idea — nobody actually gets any idea of exactly which particular person donated how much money to which particular project, right.

And this is done using this really important and fascinating topic of a zero-knowledge proof cryptography. Zero-knowledge proofs also have these really nice scalability proofs. Very powerful technology. It could get us the benefits of things like persistent reputations while at the same time, getting a lot of the benefits of anonymity.

Tim Ferriss: Seems very powerful. No, this is also a very important point. I can give two examples. One example of how you could do this, is you could just set up an organization where the organization has some smart people and those smart people do a good job of picking who the scientists are that are really worth funding. And then that organization gets a five- or year history. Yes, this organization does have a surprisingly good track record of funding studies that actually do end up turning out to be meaningful five years down the line.

And then people will just contribute through the quadratic funding scheme to this organization and the organization will be able to leverage its own reputation. Another approach is that there could be clever ways to combine quadratic funding with venture capital. The idea here is that imagine if when people make a public good, they create a coin associated with that public good and they just let people buy the coin.

And when people buy the coin, the revenues just go to the people who issue it. And then what you can do with quadratic funding, is you can basically collectively buy out these coins, right. And so anyone who bought that coin would be able to benefit, right. And so the idea is that if there are intelligent investors that are able to recognize that something will be valuable 10 years in the future, then basically they will be able to make a profit off of this.

And over time, if the market becomes more efficient, then — if anyone could has something that is maybe difficult for the wider public to determine its valuable at the beginning but then is likely to lead to some importance outcome that just everyone recognizes is really valuable sometime in the future, then these investors can fill the gap, right.

You have these two approaches. You can either rely on reputation and do it retrospectively or you can rely on this combination of quadratic funding with tokens and investments and do it prospectively. I think both of those are really interesting. Tim Ferriss: I love this possibility to combine also, right.

You could potentially have all of the elements that you described combined. Naval Ravikant: I was just thinking that campaign financing works a little bit like this. And so an individual can only gift a certain amount to a congressman or to a senator or a presidential candidate. And then the feds also have matching funds on top of that.

Tim Ferriss: Vitalik, what areas of scientific inquiry or research are on your short list of most personally interesting at the moment? Vitalik Buterin: Yeah, no. You brought up life extension. Life extension is definitely really important to me. Just even the process of aging turning into something that just becomes reversible and it being a regular thing for people to live one and a half, two centuries and then go even further from there.

Naval Ravikant: Yeah I agree with that. The Moderna vaccine was ready on January 13th. No, this is great. Naval Ravikant: Yeah, it is good if it breaks down bioconservatism to some extent, because the pace of innovation is too low. Vitalik Buterin: But I hope you guys can both come to my thousandth birthday party. Naval Ravikant: Well, are you on some kind of caloric restriction or intermittent fasting? I do again the usual exercise, nothing too fancy.

I eat kind of at least a couple of the basic supplements that the life extension cool people are recommending. Vitalik Buterin: I do not take rapamycin. Metformin is the one that I take. Ashwagandha is another that I take,. Tim Ferriss: And just for those people listening, who should know this. Number one, none of this is medical advice.

How do you decide what to implement versus not implement for yourself personally? Vitalik Buterin: I just ask around a lot of people in the life extension community. I read the studies as I look at just what are some of the high level results, and then just kind of narrow it down to a couple of things.

Tim Ferriss: It is remarkable how many people in various sub-communities have been using a lot of these interventions longitudinally. I remember when I was working on my second book looking into trans-resveratrol and finding — even at that time this was , People who had for years been using want to say milligrams per day.

So there is a lot to be gleaned from these groups. Glucagon-like peptide GLP one. Vitalik Buterin: It is, yeah. In fact, healthcare is the ultimate inelastic good. But I was actually a little disappointed with the coronavirus response because I thought we would have had faster trials of the vaccines, but the fact that they were still kind of slow and even now the deployment is being held up because we have to create these perfect vaccine delivery packages instead of just a kind of quick and dirty vaccination.

Tim Ferriss: Yeah, I also just want to add that I think given my experience with a highly stigmatized field of scientific research, which is psychedelics and psychedelic compounds for intractable or difficult to treat psychiatric conditions, I think that life extension or the community itself and proponents thereof could spend a lot of their oxygen and calories trying to convince regulators and three-letter acronyms to classify aging as a disease and therefore allocate funding, and I think that that is going to be very difficult and possibly wasteful compared to decentralized or distributed funding from citizen philanthropists or donors of various types.

So if we can just work together on the problem more, hopefully, prevent kind of like stupid nationalism from adding too much friction between things. Naval Ravikant: Okay. Yeah so one question I kind of have is given all the tumultuous change in — because coronavirus was a trigger, but it was a trigger for accelerating a lot of things that were already happening — where do you think the world heads in the next few years where maybe your peers might disagree with you?

What are your contrarian views or your kind of uniquely held individualistic views on how things are going to play out that are not yet consensus? And this is unfair because aging was a good one. You made a solid, you went out on a limb on it. Naval Ravikant: When I went through your writings, the idea that there will be many blockchains and many tokens, right, is quite different.

And I think you were the first one to really hammer that point home in a big way. And then I think this aging thing is another one. Even with Ethereum we took a very active effort of not making it too centralized in any one country or any one city in any one place.

I think it was created by mostly Canadians and your blog has a. Vitalik Buterin: Well, it depends. A lot of the initial developers were German. A lot of developers are from the US as well, one of the most efficient Eth2 clients is based in Australia. So I feel like we kind of actually took those values seriously and did it well. Who actually wants to dive into the ecosystem, what is a person to do to get involved in the Ethereum community and the ecosystem? Where are the points of leverage?

Vitalik Buterin: I think one is learning to build an application and actually trying to build an application is I think one, a great place to start. Although generally I am a much more big fan of hands-on learning. So kind of learning by doing instead of learning by taking in information. So I highly recommend just trying to build one application, for a lot of people.

I think it was one of your musings that led to the creation of Uniswap. Although maybe this is the first year where I feel like the community is outpacing your ideas like with Nifties, and with some of the games that are coming up on top of ETH and so on. I would say that the beginning of the rabbit hole, the entrance is Bitcoin. And there are analogs for what crypto can do that almost cannot be done in the real world.

And I think zero-knowledge proofs have probably been incorporated into an emerging Ethereum ecosystem even more than we expected, right? Because a lot of people called it moon math early on. It was considered too hard to be practical, but people have been chipping away at it. Vitalik Buterin: Yeah the moon math is definitely significantly less moony than it was even one or two years ago, even Zk-SNARKs, another term for zero-knowledge proofs, have just become considerably simpler sometime around one and a half years ago.

I might even try to make another post. I might modify my most recent ones on vitalik. So I feel like the ideas are definitely trickling down. So I do have another answer to the question of what contrarian things or what things are you thinking about that other people are not thinking about yet?

I think this is kind of taking a kind of cultural and social context a serious way, right? And the crypto space is going to try as hard as it can. But the reality is that governments are not trying as hard as they can. And a big part of the reason why is that government is not even so much an entity as it is a battlefield, right? And like what are the soldiers fighting on the battlefield?