@robreich @cafreiman @NathanpmYoung Oh I actually had big philanthropy specifically in mind. A big tree and a trillion blades of grass is less pluralist than five different big trees.

@robreich @cafreiman @NathanpmYoung 哦，我实际上特别想到了大慈善事业。一棵大树和一万亿片草叶不如五棵不同的大树那么多元化。

@toghrulmaharram @zengjiajun_eth @SandyPeng1 @yoavw I can't find any global storage variables that a handleOps call edits. So it just reads stuff and edits user-specific stuff, which won't block parallelization as long as you stick to one op per user per set of ops that you try to parallelize (which is the best you can do anyway)

@toghrulmaharram @zengjiajun_eth @SandyPeng1 @yoavw 我找不到handleOps 调用编辑的任何全局存储变量。因此，它只是读取内容并编辑用户特定的内容，只要您尝试并行化的每组操作坚持每个用户一个操作，就不会阻止并行化（无论如何这是您可以做的最好的事情）

@toghrulmaharram @zengjiajun_eth @SandyPeng1 @yoavw As long as you only block parallelization on writes, rather than just reads, multiple calls to a single entry point should work!

@toghrulmaharram @zengjiajun_eth @SandyPeng1 @yoavw 只要您只阻止写入并行化，而不仅仅是读取，对单个入口点的多次调用应该可以工作！

@toghrulmaharram @zengjiajun_eth @SandyPeng1 @yoavw And there's a big design space in the middle.
Is there any info or docs on what parallelization scheme Scroll is looking into?

@toghrulmaharram @zengjiajun_eth @SandyPeng1 @yoavw 中间还有很大的设计空间。
是否有任何关于 Scroll 正在研究的并行化方案的信息或文档？

@toghrulmaharram @zengjiajun_eth @SandyPeng1 @yoavw I guess that depends on what type of parallelization you have in mind. If you craft the parallelization scheme around ERC4337, then you can use it as is. The other is extreme is a totally generic parallelization like https://github.com/ethereum/EI..., which would require N entry points.

@toghrulmaharram @zengjiajun_eth @SandyPeng1 @yoavw 我想这取决于您想到的并行化类型。如果您围绕 ERC4337 设计并行化方案，那么您可以按原样使用它。另一个极端是完全通用的并行化，例如 https://github.com/ethereum/EI.. .，这将需要 N 个入口点。

@toghrulmaharram @zengjiajun_eth @SandyPeng1 Of course you also could use this scheme to do SNARK-based aggregation of EDCSA sigs, which would avoid needing to figure out how to snark pairings.

@toghrulmaharram @zengjiajun_eth @SandyPeng1 当然，您也可以使用此方案对 EDCSA 信号进行基于 SNARK 的聚合，这将避免需要弄清楚如何进行 snark 配对。

@toghrulmaharram @zengjiajun_eth @SandyPeng1 BLS signature aggregation to save on-chain data, see
https://mobile.twitter.com/Vit...
https://github.com/eth-infinit...

@toghrulmaharram @zengjiajun_eth @SandyPeng1 BLS 签名聚合以保存链上数据，请参阅
https://mobile.twitter.com/Vit...
https://github.com/eth-infinit...

@zengjiajun_eth @toghrulmaharram @SandyPeng1 @yoavw When you implement parallelization why can't you just make an entrypoint contract that uses those parallelization features to verify the ops in parallel?
Or just split between N batches and process those in parallel.

@zengjiajun_eth @toghrulmaharram @SandyPeng1 @yoavw 当您实现并行化时，为什么不能只制作一个使用这些并行化功能来并行验证操作的入口点合约？
或者只是在 N 个批次之间拆分并并行处理。

@zengjiajun_eth @SandyPeng1 And BLS compression to save data 😄
(Ok fine that requires scroll to support snark proving the bn128 pairing precompile, which is a bit hard)

@zengjiajun_eth @SandyPeng1 和 BLS 压缩来保存数据😄
（好吧，需要滚动来支持 snark 证明 bn128 配对预编译，这有点难）

@NathanpmYoung @cafreiman @tyler_m_john @moskov People today who fund projects useful to future people would get certificates that they could sell to long-term investors.
Present proxies can be fine but I do think creating explicit institutions can be good and avoid self-serving bureaucracies acting "in the name of" cause X

@NathanpmYoung @cafreiman @tyler_m_john @moskov 今天资助对未来人们有用的项目的人将获得可以出售给长期投资者的证书。
目前的代理可以很好，但我确实认为创建明确的机构可以很好，并避免自私的官僚机构“以”原因 X 行事

@NathanpmYoung @cafreiman Future people is an interesting case because it's harder to come up with an institution to represent them formally, so all we have today is present people acting as self-appointed proxies.
Maybe retroactive funding with really long time horizons?

@NathanpmYoung @cafreiman 未来的人是一个有趣的案例，因为很难找到一个正式代表他们的机构，所以我们今天所拥有的只是在场的人充当自我任命的代理人。
也许是具有很长一段时间的追溯资金？

@cafreiman @NathanpmYoung 2/3 of global inequality is between countries, 1/3 is within countries, so this is actually a pretty big deal.

@cafreiman @NathanpmYoung 2/3 的全球不平等发生在国家之间，1/3 在国家内部，所以这实际上是一件大事。

@cafreiman @NathanpmYoung Also philanthropy wins on being more internationalist. Government programs have a strong track record of favoring the welfare of the gov's own citizens, even when those citizens are much richer and helping them is much more expensive than helping people elsewhere around the world

@cafreiman @NathanpmYoung 慈善也因更加国际化而获胜。政府项目在支持政府本国公民的福利方面有着良好的记录，即使这些公民更富有并且帮助他们比帮助世界其他地方的人更昂贵

@cafreiman @NathanpmYoung Philanthropy's meta-level virtue is that it's pluralist. We already have trillions of dollars distributed by various gov agencies, adding tens of billions allocated by a mechanism that selects for very different kinds of people brings needed (and high-quality) variety.

@cafreiman @NathanpmYoung Philanthropy 的元级美德是它是多元化的。我们已经有数万亿美元由各个政府机构分配，加上数百亿美元是由一种机制分配的，该机制为非常不同的人带来所需的（和高质量的）多样性。

@robinhanson Arbitration.

@robinhanson 仲裁。

Harberger taxes on NFTs are good.
See also, this from a year ago:
https://old.reddit.com/r/ether... https://twitter.com/ArthurB/st...

Harberger 对 NFT 征税很好。
另请参阅，这是一年前的：
https://old.reddit.com/r/ether... https://twitter.com/ArthurB/st...

@ArthurB Yeah, but the fork choice does a huge number of confirmations from randomly selected validators in parallel for each slot.

@ArthurB 是的，但是分叉​​选择会为每个插槽并行地从随机选择的验证器中进行大量确认。

@ArthurB The beacon chain already makes it require a >1/3 coalition to revert a block (unless you are guessing-a-private-key-level lucky in choosing coalitions). Though I agree that single slot finality is a significant further improvement.

@ArthurB 信标链已经使它需要一个

@mizbani_ @transmissions11 @gakonst Isn't that just a PLONK verifier with a "plug in your own verification key" feature?
(I don't think you can make it *fully* generic because there's lots of different ZK schemes out there, eg. based on pairings vs IPA vs hashes)

@mizbani_ @transmissions11 @gakonst 这不就是一个带有“插入自己的验证密钥”功能的 PLONK 验证器吗？
（我认为你不能让它*完全*通用，因为那里有很多不同的 ZK 方案，例如基于配对、IPA 和哈希）

Another great book by @Delphi_Digital, this time on rollups. https://twitter.com/jon_charb/...

@Delphi_Digital 的另一本好书，这次是关于汇总的。 https://twitter.com/jon_charb/...