Welcome to today’s Daily General Discussion!

Please use this thread to discuss Ethereum topics, news, events, and even price!

Yes, we are trying something new and will allow price discussion, but only in this thread! Price discussion posted elsewhere in the subreddit will continue to be removed.

As always, keep it friendly and follow the sub’s rules.

The ticker is ETH.

New article: Aggregation & atomization: dependency funding round dynamics

>>>>>>>> read the full piece, summary below

The term “public goods” has been diluted - “dependency” might be better. Round-based funding mechanisms incentivize atomization - how can we avoid this?

We have failed to develop standards of rigor for the use of the "public goods" term. When it applies to everything, it describes nothing. “Dependency” is better for the Ethereum software ecosystem: crucial bits of infrastructure not directly maintained by an actor.

Recurring Funding Rounds come with tradeoffs

- attention games
- eligibility scoping
- high expectations of evaluators
- atomization incentive

Reflecting on OP Retro Round 5

- incentivizing atomization
- Legibility is not impact
- Stewardship is less legible - for good reason
- Misconceptions about levels of PG funding

https://preview.redd.it/zlkqaqpd2cyd1.png?width=3720&format=png&auto=webp&s=74616256a8524d67ed4bb9c4314835f3cc0047bd

Possible modifications for rounds

- Remove caps on allocations
- Give special consideration to projects with a large number of beneficiaries
- Cap projects per round
- Explicitly weight the number of beneficiaries in the allocation formula

topics include: public goods vs dependency, impact, allocators, commons, u/Optimism Retro Round 5, @ProtocolGuild, Ethereum core protocol, @gitcoin, @OctantApp + more

October has been a steady month for Ethereum staking, ending with over 34.4 million ETH staked and 4,9k validators currently in the entry queue.

While this month hasn't introduced significant changes in staking metrics, there's plenty of exciting work underway for Ethereum's future development. Preparations for Pectra are in full swing, and Vitalik Buterin has released thought-provoking posts on the potential futures of the Ethereum protocol.

https://x.com/eth_everstake/status/1851640585746026531

https://preview.redd.it/dax01tlz5byd1.png?width=1943&format=png&auto=webp&s=ca3d28d9ec985e216ab44d818aa4e73243bb4a23

Data Sources

This dashboard has been compiled using metrics from the following sources:

• https://beaconcha.in/
• https://www.validatorqueue.com/
• https://ultrasound.money/
• https://explorer.rated.network/

If you're looking to engage with the Ethereum ecosystem, consider Everstake staking solution. You can start with as little as 0.1 ETH and unlock new opportunities within the network.

https://everstake.one/link/stake-ethereum

Stay tuned for more updates!

https://preview.redd.it/kwfa1wk1payd1.png?width=2824&format=png&auto=webp&s=cf194f89d8043bde3deb46912a04e4eb4cbbaffb

https://preview.redd.it/cbwoza4tpayd1.png?width=1614&format=png&auto=webp&s=2f9499f245c79d318b1bb4b01408482484107393

Okay, this is weird. I just tried to set up a validator on Holesky testnet and noticed I'd have to wait 18 DAYS for activation. Double-checked the queue - there are 32,033 validators waiting. On a testnet! Something's definitely cooking...

What's even more interesting is that this massive queue started forming right after EIP-7002 (the beacon state root in the EVM proposal) hit the testnet. For those not familiar, this proposal essentially enables smart contracts to verify beacon chain state, which is crucial for many staking innovations.

Looking through some GitHub discussions and Discord channels, I've noticed a lot of activity around:

• DVT (Distributed Validator Technology) implementations
• Restaking protocols
• Liquid staking solutions
• New staking pool mechanisms

I'm particularly intrigued by the DVT testing activities because of the recent Lido simpleDVT and CSM discussions about implementing validator splitting into DVT solutions. Seeing projects like SSV and others actively testing on Holesky makes me wonder if we're closer to seeing production-ready DVT implementations than we think.

Anyone else noticed this unusual testnet activity? What do you think is being tested at such scale?

Hey, we are looking for crypto games for put on for a winter showcase. Details of the showcase are:

Winter Web3 Gaming Shows

Some of details include:

• Games that are not yet complete should participate in the event. Just have marketing materials and wishlist pages ready.
• Creators will stream and play the games, providing a valuable opportunity to promote them. Developers are encouraged to stream with creators and discuss the game in real-time.
• Developers can also participate in 1:1 interviews to discuss their creative process.
• Pre-orders and sales can be bundled, allowing consumers to purchase multiple games in one transaction.
• Offer incentives for players with random crypto drops during live streams or host contests around short-form content.
• Encourage sign-ups for playtesting to engage players in testing unreleased games.

Please apply or share with other Web3 Games, and feel free to leave questions/comments below.

Welcome to today’s Daily General Discussion!

Please use this thread to discuss Ethereum topics, news, events, and even price!

Yes, we are trying something new and will allow price discussion, but only in this thread! Price discussion posted elsewhere in the subreddit will continue to be removed.

As always, keep it friendly and follow the sub’s rules.

The ticker is ETH.

The transaction hash is 0x83c48dbcaba55c0a6852fb7f21b04e56e6b316c00ceb5ab6234e7c699c719beb .... my portfolio tracker is showing a transaction that I sent USDT early this morning, though I didn't send any USDT to any other wallet this morning I only received USDT. On etherscan the TXN Type is displayed as 2 (EIP-1559), I don't really understand what that means, I looked it up but am too stupid to understand it I think. I THINK that the funds are NOT actually missing from my account, though honestly I don't remember how much USDT I had before the transaction showed up. Any help is GREATLY APPRECIATED. I will literally pay someone to tutor me on this stuff, I am pretty lost. THANK YOU, EVERYONE!

Here’s a quick story “from the trenches”. 

First a bit of context:

I guess most people here use crypto primarily via desktop wallets (like MetaMask). So you don’t use crypto the way you’d use Cash App or Revolut for everyday payments or 10 small txs per day.

But the truth is that people spend most of their non-work time on mobiles, scrolling YouTube, Instagram, or WhatsApp. So, if we want Ethereum to reach significant consumer adoption, our mobile experiences must be great because this is what people are used to, and troubleshooting stuff on mobile is very irritating. Plus most people in Asia and Africa are mobile-first. 

Why do I even talk about it?

So we've been building Kiwi for like 1.5 yrs. Our idea has been to stay open and Ethereum-aligned. This means that we haven’t set up “Sign in with Google” or embedded wallets powered by Privy, Capsule, and others. We haven’t even built an Android or Apple app - we have a PWA app so that everyone can use it.

Since our app is primarily focused on people reading and discussing Ethereum-related content, the mobile experience is very important for us. But unfortunately, mobile wallets just don’t work.

I've been flying around the world to attend conferences - from Istanbul to LA and saw people getting onboarded to our app. They used Rainbow, Coinbase Wallet, Metamask and many other wallets. 

Metamask basically doesn't work most of the time. Rainbow sometimes breaks down, too. Coinbase wallet used to be the best, but now they redirect people to create a passkey wallet, which is confusing.

And it’s not only Kiwi - many users have similar problems on established apps like Zora. Some just say: “Ah yeah, it’s normal. I will figure it out once I get in front of my laptop”. Can you imagine trying to onboard users to your app in these circumstances?

Last year, my co-founder even made a viral thread about testing different mobile wallets, and since then, not a lot has changed: https://x.com/timdaub/status/1673591390687690753

And it’s not that the Ethereum community doesn’t care about the UX. Vitalik even said at one of his talks: “We should be as decentralized and open as Linux and Android, and at the same time have as consistent a user experience as Apple.”

But if Steve Jobs were still alive and saw what the hell is going on with our mobile wallet connections, he'd just ban crypto wallets from AppStore forever.

Wallets are something that needs to work 99.9999% of the time. You can't build consumer crypto apps - and have real adoption - when wallets work 80% of the time. But this is the sad reality that’s making the adoption much harder.

And the reason everyone is so excited about embedded wallets is because they go around these obvious bugs. But it's not a solution either because the dapp gets the vendor locked in, and the user has to create and send money to a new wallet without his identity and onchain history. And the whole idea is to have your ENS and onchain history in one place, in your hot wallet. 

The question is, why does it keep happening? Maybe because it's just complex - people use different browsers - from Firefox, through Chrome up to Opera - and wallets must be compatible with all of them. But then, how do the desktop wallets work 99.99% of the time?

If we had solved the Merge, I imagine we would have found a way to connect mobile wallets reliably. But it’s been 1.5 years now, and this mobile wallet connectivity problem is still omnipresent.

Hello! I'm looking to implement a crypto payment system where users can deposit funds without logging in—ideally through a simple QR code scan or by pasting a wallet address. However, I still need a way to track each user and monitor their total deposits. The main requirements are:

1. Users deposit anonymously without requiring login.
2. The system needs to associate each deposit with a specific user ID for tracking purposes.
3. I want to know how much each user has deposited over time.
4. Ideally, I’d like to minimize gas fees and avoid dust deposits.

Questions:

1. Has anyone implemented a similar system or found ways to make anonymous deposits work while tracking users reliably?
2. When scanning the QR code in MetaMask, the metadata field appears empty. Has anyone encountered this issue, and is there a workaround to pass data reliably with the QR code?
3. Would using smart contracts be feasible in this context? If so, how could I reduce gas fees and avoid creating dust amounts?
4. Alternatively, is there a way to generate unique deposit addresses for each user and avoid dust completely?

Welcome to today’s Daily General Discussion!

Please use this thread to discuss Ethereum topics, news, events, and even price!

Yes, we are trying something new and will allow price discussion, but only in this thread! Price discussion posted elsewhere in the subreddit will continue to be removed.

As always, keep it friendly and follow the sub’s rules.

The ticker is ETH.

Yesterday I tried to make a payment, so I bought some USDC on Ethereum network and sent it to my Trust Wallet. I moved $650$ worth of USDC and paid about $4-5 in gas fee for the transaction. No biggie.

I decided to not make the payment after all, and now I want to send back the USDC so I can sell them, but TrustWallet wants over $130 of gas fees. (UPDATE: IT'S OVER 270 NOW.)

How is this possible? Am I doing something wrong? How could the transaction cost about $4 yesterday and over $130 today?

Btw I checked multiple times during the day and the cost was always insanely high.

I mean I understand gas fees are dependant on congestion of ETH network but $130 for a single transaction?

How can I get my money back to Revolut without losing almost $140 just for sending it back and forth? This is insanity.

On Trust Wallet there are multiple options of selling my USDC directly but I don't know if they are trustworthy(MoonPay or Ramp).

https://imgur.com/a/ffBjxVK

EDIT: The fee is about $270 now. 😂😂 Seriously, is Trust Wallet a scam? Am I overlooking something?

Even Swapping my USDC to ETH costs about $270. How could it cost 5$ yesterday, same ETH network, and today 270?

If someone has any idea how to help me get my money back without paying these insane fees, I will send him/her like $20 or so. Thank you.

I'm writing a report about institutional products being built on crypto rails, and curious what products ppl are aware of that are being built on Ethereum. Blackrock's BUIDL fund is a big one.. what else have I missed?

Welcome to today’s Daily General Discussion!

Please use this thread to discuss Ethereum topics, news, events, and even price!

Yes, we are trying something new and will allow price discussion, but only in this thread! Price discussion posted elsewhere in the subreddit will continue to be removed.

As always, keep it friendly and follow the sub’s rules.

The ticker is ETH.

With Ethereum gas fees staying pretty high, what keeps people on mainnet instead of moving to at least some of the L2 solutions? I know the mainnet has unmatched security and decentralization, but with more projects going multi chain, it feels harder to justify the extra cost.

For those who still prefer mainnet, what’s the main reason? Security, habit, or something else? Interested to hear your thoughts!

This isn't personal promotion, I'm looking for advice on approach to take. I'm a web3 designer searching for opportunities to work with web3 projects. Applied to a couple with no show. What's your go-to strategy or advice for landing a job as a web3 designer in the Ethereum space? Thanks.

I’m posting this because Zerion wallet just cost me funds in what looks like either a major UI failure or worse: an intentional setup to siphon funds. After following Zerion’s instructions step-by-step, my swap transaction directed my assets to a mystery address without delivering any of the tokens I was supposed to receive. Here’s the rundown – and I’m curious if anyone else has seen their funds vanish this way.

What Happened:

I attempted to swap 160 SPX6900 for SOL using Zerion, which recommended 1inch as the swap provider. I followed the process exactly, hitting the big SWAP button multiple times until finally clicking Sign and Send after the transaction had been verified safe by Zerion. But instead of completing the swap, my funds were sent to an unknown address, leaving me with nothing in return.

My Attempts to Resolve This:

• The Support Deflection: I sent Zerion the transaction hashes, multiple screenshots showing I used “SWAP” at each step, and even a full screen recording of the process. Their response? “It looks like you accidentally chose ‘Send’ instead.” Ridiculous. Zerion then claimed they couldn’t locate the transaction in their system, but that doesn’t explain why their UI sent my funds somewhere else.
• External Verification: After contacting 1inch, they confirmed the swap was never initiated on their end, suggesting the issue is entirely with Zerion. Zerion’s UI directly led my assets to an unknown address, which they now disavow.

My Concerns:

• Is This Intentional? The support deflection has me wondering if this is part of a deliberate strategy by Zerion. Directing funds to a side wallet that gathers small, seemingly “lost” amounts could easily go unnoticed or be written off by most users who don’t want the hassle. It feels like a setup, especially given the vague responses and deflection tactics I’m seeing.
• Security Issue or Scam? If Zerion’s swap function can so easily redirect funds without fulfilling the swap, how many other users have been unknowingly impacted? And what accountability is Zerion planning to take here? So far its been none. The burden of proof has fallen on me, the user, and even with providing ample evidence they remain willfully obtuse.
• Passing the Burden: When I pushed for answers, Zerion suggested I risk more funds to “reproduce the issue.” As if losing more money would magically solve this? This is a clear attempt to dodge responsibility instead of addressing the serious flaw (or scam) in their system.

If this is a UI bug, a security vulnerability, or worse an intentional scam Zerion needs to be held accountable, not sidestep responsibility and accountability. We’re trusting platforms like Zerion with our assets, and they have a duty to ensure their UI isn’t leading users straight into financial loss.