“6529 Memes” is the best curation I’ve ever made, and also the one I had most fun doing. There’s a beautiful story being told by the art along the exhibition — of seizing culture with our jpgs, of the importance of decentralization and freedom to transact, and thus conquering the future with the open metaverse and sovereign digital rights — in a way that is comprehensible by the new audiences but still leaves them a bit mindblown. The curatorial text guiding the visitors through the sections is inspiring and educational, and the mix of incredible visuals and sharp or dank crypto memes help audiences grasp the significance of this art movement. In total, there are 64 CC0 NFTs in exhibition, matched and sequentially distributed among the 27 displays: mostly The Memes by @punk6529, a few Meme Lab pieces, one 6529 Complaints card, and a special @Casa_NUA Meme Card submission, which I’ll talk about soon… We also exhibit a @BillyNFTees oil painting brought from Italy by my own hands, and hand out mini NFT Adoption Pathway and Meme Enjoyoor cards for visitors to take home. A 6529 onboarding stall is being set up. And the screens displaying NFTs with audio sport individual headphones for visitor immersion. We’ll be showing a lot more over the course of the month!

Name & Symbol: memes will continue ($memes)
Address: 0xf74548802f4c700315f019fde17178b392ee4444

Now, the quantum resistance roadmap. Today, four things in Ethereum are quantum-vulnerable: * consensus-layer BLS signatures * data availability (KZG commitments+proofs) * EOA signatures (ECDSA) * Application-layer ZK proofs (KZG or groth16) We can tackle these step by step: ## Consensus-layer signatures Lean consensus includes fully replacing BLS signatures with hash-based signatures (some variant of Winternitz), and using STARKs to do aggregation. Before lean finality, we stand a good chance of getting the Lean available chain. This also involves hash-based signatures, but there are much fewer signatures (eg. 256-1024 per slot), so we do not need STARKs for aggregation. One important thing upstream of this is choosing the hash function. This may be "Ethereum's last hash function", so it's important to choose wisely. Conventional hashes are too slow, and the most aggressive forms of Poseidon have taken hits on their security analysis recently. Likely options are: * Poseidon2 plus extra rounds, potentially non-arithmetic layers (eg. Monolith) mixed in * Poseidon1 (the older version of Poseidon, not vulnerable to any of the recent attacks on Poseidon2, but 2x slower) * BLAKE3 or similar (take the most efficient conventional hash we know) ## Data availability Today, we rely pretty heavily on KZG for erasure coding. We could move to STARKs, but this has two problems: 1. If we want to do 2D DAS, then our current setup for this relies on the "linearity" property of KZG commitments; with STARKs we don't have that. However, our current thinking is that it should be sufficient given our scale targets to just max out 1D DAS (ie. PeerDAS). Ethereum is taking a more conservative posture, it's not trying to be a high-scale data layer for the world. 2. We need proofs that erasure coded blobs are correctly constructed. KZG does this "for free". STARKs can substitute, but a STARK is ... bigger than a blob. So you need recursive starks (though there's also alternative techniques, that have their own tradeoffs). This is okay, but the logistics of this get harder if you want to support distributed blob selection. Summary: it's manageable, but there's a lot of engineering work to do. ## EOA signatures Here, the answer is clear: we add native AA (see https://t.co/YD9nIpsxcC ), so that we get first-class accounts that can use any signature algorithm. However, to make this work, we also need quantum-resistant signature algorithms to actually be viable. ECDSA signature verification costs 3000 gas. Quantum-resistant signatures are ... much much larger and heavier to verify. We know of quantum-resistant hash-based signatures that are in the ~200k gas range to verify. We also know of lattice-based quantum-resistant signatures. Today, these are extremely inefficient to verify. However, there is work on vectorized math precompiles, that let you perform operations (+, *, %, dot product, also NTT / butterfly permutations) that are at the core of lattice math, and also STARKs. This could greatly reduce the gas cost of lattice-based signatures to a similar range, and potentially go even lower. The long-term fix is protocol-layer recursive signature and proof aggregation, which could reduce these gas overheads to near-zero. ## Proofs Today, a ZK-SNARK costs ~300-500k gas. A quantum-resistant STARK is more like 10m gas. The latter is unacceptable for privacy protocols, L2s, and other users of proofs. The solution again is protocol-layer recursive signature and proof aggregation. So let's talk about what this is. In EIP-8141, transactions have the ability to include a "validation frame", during which signature verifications and similar operations are supposed to happen. Validation frames cannot access the outside world, they can only look at their calldata and return a value, and nothing else can look at their calldata. This is designed so that it's possible to replace any validation frame (and its calldata) with a STARK that verifies it (potentially a single STARK for all the validation frames in a block). This way, a block could "contain" a thousand validation frames, each of which contains either a 3 kB signature or even a 256 kB proof, but that 3-256 MB (and the computation needed to verify it) would never come onchain. Instead, it would all get replaced by a proof verifying that the computation is correct. Potentially, this proving does not even need to be done by the block builder. Instead, I envision that it happens at mempool layer: every 500ms, each node could pass along the new valid transactions that it has seen, along with a proof verifying that they are all valid (including having validation frames that match their stated effects). The overhead is static: only one proof per 500ms. Here's a post where I talk about this: https://t.co/rAUSJjW7WL https://t.co/EtXpkaDll5

Name & Symbol: ARAI ($AA)
Address: 0x01bf3d77cd08b19bf3f2309972123a2cca0f6936

.@balajis is talking about the code based order. But a code based order needs culture. It needs identity. It needs portable reputation. NFTs are the atomic unit of digital property. Memes are how they spread. Reputation is how they compound. The Memes by 6529 is not just a NFT collection. It funds public goods across art, science & tech. It is infrastructure for Web 4: the code-based order. ART is the EXIT STRATEGY by @XCOPYART. https://t.co/60QXl6hpqj

Name & Symbol: memes will continue ($memes)
Address: 0xf74548802f4c700315f019fde17178b392ee4444

I remember sitting in my car before my kid’s soccer game, trying to learn about crypto and NFTs, when I found this interview. It’s no exaggeration to say it changed my life because NFT’s finally made sense to me and led me to join you degens.

Name & Symbol: Degen ($DEGEN)
Address: 0x4ed4e862860bed51a9570b96d89af5e1b0efefed