The Protocol Cluster has published two new posts: Hegotá EIP Opinion Post and Tier List evaluates and grades all 62 EIPs proposed for Hegotá, providing the cluster’s first unified tier list for a network upgrade Current and Emerging Priorities covers commitments and research arcs, anchored on a quantum-resistant Ethereum L1 by Dec. 2029 Offered as one input to Hegotá scoping, roughly 60 researchers, engineers, and individual domain experts across all 9 teams in the Protocol Cluster contributed to the Hegotá tier list, providing 397 tier grades before discussing contested items live. The plan, commitments, and shared set of cluster-wide priorities covered in the companion post provide the context behind the final tier grades. The Protocol cluster will host a Reddit AMA on r/ethereum on September 16 at 2pm UTC to talk through these priorities, the Hegotá tier list, and anything else on your mind. → Submit questions ahead of time here: pad.ethereum.org/form/#/2/fo… Read the articles here: → EF Protocol - Current and Emerging Priorities: blog.ethereum.org/2026/09/07… → EF Protocol - The Hegotá EIP Opinion Post and Tier List: blog.ethereum.org/2026/09/07…

Happy to report that after a month of work, EIP-8198 aka Quick Slots was merged as a feature spec in the Ethereum consensus specs! Many thanks to @jih2nn and @JustinTraglia for their tireless work as spec maintainers 🙌 What does "merging specifications" mean? Specifying a feature means writing up its behaviour, in code and in English, in a repository that has accumulated the detailed description of every feature since the launch of Ethereum’s Proof-of-Stake chain. This is the ground truth of how Ethereum consensus runs, and the model that all consensus clients follow to come to agreement with each other. Anyone can contribute to this repository, by submitting “pull requests” with more code and more text specifying a new feature. Pull requests remain open while the proposed changes and additions are reviewed, by specs maintainers and by the persons submitting their contributions. Once they have been sufficiently reviewed, with edge cases uncovered, the pull request can then be “merged”, and live inside the codebase of the specs, instead of besides it. This is usually a signal that the feature’s specs are now stable enough to evaluate in the context of other proposed changes. In particular, it also makes it easier for clients who want to start prototyping the feature, to do so on specifications that are no longer expected to change drastically. There can still be misses and unknowns, but at least the current thing has passed this first, close review. Importantly, this does not mean that faster slots have made it into Hegotá. We are still two steps away from it: Quick slots were Proposed for Inclusion on August 6th, and next week, on October 1st, we will likely be discussing raising its level to Considered for Inclusion at ACD. Should a decision then be made to include in the fork, quick slots would then become Scheduled for Inclusion, the last step. PFI -> CFI -> SFI. Easy eh? 😅 So this means the job's not done 🫡 We'll continue to advocate for a strong prototype of quick slots based on the specifications. We're continuing our outreach to ecosystem smart contracts and teams for who a slot change may impact their operations. And we're continuing to research the future of shortening slot times with post-quantum cryptography and zkEVM in view, beyond Hegotá. In the meantime, find the specs here: github.com/ethereum/consensu…

Ondo's portfolio tokens built on BlackRock-developed strategies launched on 2 chains. On day one, 99%+ of the value sits on @ethereum according to @RWA_xyz. Issuers deploy everywhere. The balance goes where the liquidity, the venues, and 11+ years of uptime already are.

Who are the best accounts under 10k followers

very important we ship post-quantum ethereum asap. here is a music video to convince you:

The Fast Confirmation Rule is a new rule that may soon be relied on for millions of $$$s in bridging volume. Here is how we keep it secure. - FCR is an algorithm clients run locally instead of something they read from the chain (like finality). It's more complicated to implement. That is why we advise all users to leverage client diversity and rely on the output of at least two different consensus clients. For example, only fast confirm a block if both Lighthouse and Teku fast confirm the block. - @fradamt is working on formal verification of FCR. That would mean FCR's safety guarantee is proven against the Ethereum consensus spec's FCR implementation (under the regular FCR assumptions). - Both the consensus spec as well as client implementations are now covered under the Ethereum Foundation's Bug Bounty Program. That means bugs found by security researchers could lead to good payouts!

67 years ago today, ‘Take Five’ by Dave Brubeck Quartet was released as a single. It went on to become the best-selling jazz single of the 20th century.

Recently I was chatting with engineers building institutional permissioned blockchains and realized how different the engineering culture and workflow is (spoiler: it doesn't sound fun 😬). Glad to be on the other side.

I have conducted an audit of Anthropic's finances. What I have found is so shocking that I am calling for a Congressional investigation. Anthropic is not just seeking regulatory capture. It has built a regulatory capture machine that cannot be turned off. Structural financial incentives make it impossible for Anthropic -- I call it the Anthropic Network -- to turn off its own AI doom cycle. It starts with METR. Dario Amodei proposes "third-party evaluators" to assess the risk of Anthropic's models. He proposes METR for this purpose. But METR is financially dependent on the Anthropic's success -- specifically, on the explosive growth of more than $7 billion dollars in Anthropic stock. Dustin Moskovitz invested this stock into Good Ventures Foundation, where it represents the majority of that organization's portfolio. And GVF is the overwhelming funder of the entire Anthropic Network ecosystem. This stock was worth $500 million early last year. It is worth more than $7.7 billion just ~16 months later. METR -- and all of those building a career its parent organizations -- cannot afford to disrupt that growth. Because if Anthropic goes under, many of the organizations that fund METR go under as well. But if Anthropic succeeds, METR and its parent organizations become more richly financed to regulate AI -- something those at METR want very much. The "third-party evaluator" is not "third-party" at all. The evaluator is on Anthropic's payroll. If this were the end of it, that's bad. But that isn't all. The same organizations that fund METR also fund the many organizations, such as the Tarbell Center, that promote AI Doom. The Tarbell Center publishes AI Doom articles in The Verge, Science, LA Times, The Dispatch, TIME, and others. They are selling the problem, and then selling the solution to the problem -- from the same money pile: Anthropic's. All of these organizations are financially dependent on the same exploding $7 billion money pile. As Anthropic grows more and more powerful, its AI Doom Machine grows better and better financed -- louder and louder. Meanwhile, the regulatory regime seeded in METR grows larger to solve the increasingly loud -- now hysterical -- problem of AI Doom that the Anthropic Network itself created. From this standpoint, as Anthropic becomes more powerful, AI might be getting scarier, sure -- but the positive feedback loop also becomes more deafening -- independent of objective facts. This itself is an objective fact. The deafening AI Doom is part of an business model, that, as it expands, so too does the AI Doom messaging -- there is simply more money to do it. But the problem also goes in the other direction: If Anthropic dies, the Regulatory Regime and the AI Doom Machine are crippled or die. Neither METR nor Tarbell nor the other organizations in the Anthropic Network can allow that to happen. Hence, neither METR or the AI Doom Machine can be trusted to provide independent assessments of Anthropic's models or AI more broadly. They simply are not organizations independent of Anthropic. And Anthropic cannot detach itself from METR or Tarbell or countless other safety orgs (not shown here), either, because they drive hype for the models and the possibility of eventual regulatory capture, and Anthropic will not give that up willingly. What's more, the people at all of these organizations are all the same ecosystem, the same community. They just shuffle between organizations. The Anthropic Network is therefore, so long as it is successful, locked into a self-amplifying feedback loop inside an ideological monoculture. And that feedback loop is winning. That's what Jacob Coxon is. China is keeping messaging tight. That is why optimism for AI is so high in China. America has Anthropic: a massive company pushing anti-AI propaganda at a state level. Anthropic will either create hysteria until American AI slows down and China wins, or it will create fractures throughout American society with severe political consequences. Ironically, because of the structural financial incentives underpinning the Anthropic Network, it has become the same kind of self-amplifying virus that it fantasizes AI to become in the future -- while hiding its tracks just as carefully. It is the mirror of the same AI virus that it hypothesizes to consume America. Anthropic's business model, models itself after the very thing it claims to fear. Except Anthropic's ideology infects humans, not computers. Congress must investigate. Evidence and Github in next post. Then some supplementary figures.

Last week, @christine_dkim got an #Ethereum community member's perspective on the issue of client funding. This week, she's going to get a Bitcoiners' perspective on the matter. Stay tuned for a new episode coming out this Friday, 9/18!