与「Découpe」相关的搜索结果

22 ans après : pourquoi il n'y a rien qui va dans cette célèbre et spectaculaire scène de combat entre Achille et Boagrius? Tour d'abord, aucun des deux ne dispose de lance, qui est l'arme de 1er contact par excellence pour des hoplites. On en oeut pas imagi er un duel sans lance! Boagrius, pourtant équipé d'un bouclier lourd d'hoplite lance 2 javelines de peltaste léger et rend inutilisable le bouclier d'Achille, pourtant fabriqué par le dieu forgeron Héphaïstos lui-même, mais soit! Mais pourquoi Boagrius ne lève t'il pas son bouclier quand il voit Achille sauter, où ne lui découpe t'il pas le bras gauche non protégé alors qu'il a armé son épée pour ça? Pourtant il n'a pas l'air d'être un lapin de 6 semaines! 😬

Jensen Huang, le CEO et co-fondateur de Nvidia, vient de démissionner parce qu’on lui a découvert deux liaisons extra-conjugales avec des femmes adultes et consentantes. Pendant ce temps, les pédophiles, violeurs et cannibales du réseau Epstein restent confortablement en poste. Elle est pas belle, la vie?

😳 EN IRAN, UNE FEMME FAIT UNE DÉCOUVERTE CHOQUANTE SOUS SON LIT APRÈS DES ANNÉES SANS ENFANTS ! Elle accusait son mari avant de regarder sous leur lit et de découvrir l’impensable.

One step closer to 4-8x faster Ethereum finality! It took some time and lots of tokens, but we now have a formally verified proposal for a decoupled consensus protocol in I* (a future Ethereum upgrade)! Not yet a full spec (up next), but it includes all the key consensus-relevant details to become one. Since Ethereum aspires to be live without most of the stake online, the protocol involves many more components than a normal BFT protocol, and its correctness involves much more than standard safety and liveness. Those nuanced properties are now verified! What's more, I came away convinced that all protocol design will involve AI-assisted Formal Verification in the future, both for correctness and iteration speed. The work wasn't limited to just: Design the protocol -> Formally verify it Instead, the loop became more like: Design -> Formal Model -> Find exactly what breaks and why -> Redesign it. For a fairly complicated protocol like this one, I think having the Lean model be part of the design loop played a big role in accelerating the process. A future with agents paired with formal models is a superpower for Ethereum development, because they can then use those models to find exactly where an argument breaks down, formalize counterexamples, test proposed fixes, iterate on the protocol. Many details that would slip under the radar when asking agents (and indeed, humans) can now be specified exactly and checked by the Lean kernel. This then forces agents to be more precise and lets them make verifiable progress on their own. It's been incredible to see this play out, seeing agents find gaps and propose protocol changes to fix them. In other words, autoresearch can speed up protocol design, formal verification is here to stay, and Ethereum Finality will get faster.

🚨 SlowMist TI Alert 🚨 💸 @VerusCoin Loss: ~$7.5M ⚠️ Unlike the prior 0x6990…b321 exploit, which decoupled the validated proof from the executed transfer payload, this attack hash-bound the transfers to the CCE but failed to validate the CCE’s economic backing; both exploit flawed cross-chain import validation. 🔍 Root Cause: `VerusProof.checkExportAndTransfers` verified selected CCE fields—including `hashReserveTransfers` against attacker-supplied serialized transfers and the source/destination IDs—but did not enforce the CCE’s accounting semantics. It failed to parse or validate `totalamounts`, `totalfees`, `totalburned`, CTxOut `nValue`, or whether the prior CCE outpoint carried sufficient value and assets to cover the claimed transfers. As a result, a matching transfer hash was incorrectly treated as authorization to release bridge assets, rather than merely a commitment to the requested transfers. 📌 Attacker EOA: 0xbda71b58cec0b1c20a8f87ccd52fa0679747855c 📌 Victim Bridge: 0x71518580f36feceffe0721f06ba4703218cd7f63 📌 Vulnerable Contract: 0x54e03a1682fd0bb065b669f6296f97028dcfd4ce 📌 Fund Receiver: 0xcfd0a20703cd11e0b9f665e1c3f1ef989c142d54 Impact: The attacker submitted a successor CCE anchored to an accepted Verus state root, containing a hash commitment to eight attacker-defined reserve transfers. Because the bridge did not verify whether the CCE’s economic fields backed those transfers, it executed eight payouts from bridge custody to the attacker-controlled receiver—releasing ETH, DAI, USDC, USDT, and four additional tokens without enforced cross-chain asset backing. Powered by Tx:

Two weeks ago, Ethereum researchers met in Berlin to continue charting the protocol's long-term trajectory, following along discussions with client teams in Svalbard in April. The updated strawmap is at and I attached a picture of it to this post. My own high-level takeaways: * "Lean Ethereum" is not a single one-shot upgrade, it is a collection of improvements that will come online to the Ethereum network over the course of three or four years. But make no mistake, this IS the third major iteration of Ethereum in the same way that the Merge was the second. Almost every major piece of the protocol will be replaced: - Verification through recursive STARKs, rather than direct re-execution. Recursive STARKs become an enshrined first-class core component of the protocol - Replacing everything quantum-vulnerable with quantum-safe alternatives - Consensus: decoupled available chain and finality, one or two-round finality. Theoretically optimal security properties, simpler than today, and faster than today - Multidimensional gas - State: not just tree structure, but what *types* of state are available - Changes to client architecture ... At the same time, simplification, cleanup and future-proofing. And this will all be done in a way that minimizes disruption to existing application. We've done this before (the Merge), we can do it again. * H-star (aka Hegota) is probably Ethereum's last thematically "pre-Lean" fork. Starting from I-star, most of everything we do will have a very strong "Lean" feel to it in one way or another. * Privacy is no longer an afterthought, it is a first class goal. When designing Frames, the mempool, additions to the state tree, we explicitly ask the question "okay, how do quantum-safe, intermediary-free privacy protocol transactions go through this, and what is the overhead?" * Formal verification of everything for security. * FV also makes us much more comfortable with canonicalization (having pieces of the protocol that are directly defined as a piece of bytecode expressed in some language). evm-asm is being written in part to become a canonical proof system for the EVM. * Quantum safety has shifted up a LOT in priority. This adds a lot of work (eg. finalizing a quantum-safe blobs design has become urgent; this work has already been ongoing for months) * Probably the single most disruptive part of the plan is the changes to state. There is growing consensus around leaving present-day-style "dynamic state" mostly unchanged, but scaling it only a medium amount, and adding new types of state that are more scalability-friendly (eg. no need for builders to sync/store all of it) but more restrictive, and that will scale a large amount. eg. possible Ethereum in 2030: 2 TB of present-day-style (dynamic) state, and 100 TB of new-style (scalable but restrictive) state This "new-style" state would work very well for ERC20s, NFTs, many defi use cases, but not eg. highly "central" objects like Uniswap contracts, or onchain order books, or other complex things (which are crucial for Ethereum but which only take up a small percentage of state) Hence, it will not be *necessary* to rewrite any apps, but it will be *very cost-effective* to eg. rewrite an ERC20 token into a newer design that uses a new type of UTXO storage that is currently being explored, so that it will have >10x lower txfees. Design of these new state types (current ideas: keyed nonces, ring buffers, UTXOs, statically accessible state, temp state) is an area where we will need a lot of feedback from application developers (incl. privacy-friendly application developers) and probably several rounds of rethinking and iteration. * In the context of a much larger total state size, we need to figure out the incentive issues around who stores this state and what motivates them to. Even saying "each node stores 1%" is not good enough - why do they store that 1% and why are they willing to serve it? This is being elevated as a first-class research area. * Ethereum will need to have a "VM" other than EVM in one form or another - at the very least, we need something like leanISA for recursive STARKs - and the gains are large in exposing it to users so that we support programmable privacy and better scalability. Right now, the most likely contenders are leanISA and RISC-V. My own ideal is that in this world, we adjust the protocol so that the EVM becomes a high-level-language compiler-level feature, and the protocol only "sees" RISC-V / leanISA directly. But this is still far away. * Gas limit increases, blob increases and slot time decreases will happen many times over the next ~5 years. We expect a large gas limit increase with Glasterdam. Each step of increased scale or decreased slot time is a matter of getting to the point where it is safe to do it, which comes from a combination of client optimization and protocol changes. Ethereum is CROPS. Ethereum is scaling. Ethereum is reinventing itself. Onward.

BTC −5.2% 7d but −33% YTD, and it closed at its 30d low. The levered way to own it fell far harder: MSTR −41.7% over 30d, 22.5pt behind BTC. The gap points to stress in the funding stack, not just amplified BTC beta. SOL was the only major to decouple to the upside: +6% 7d, 11.2pt ahead of BTC, on its own flow (tokenized-equity volume, ETF inflows, high staked share). Watch SOL/BTC around 0.00115. 2/8

A Japanese Engineer Vanished in Dalian. Beijing Just Showed Its Cards. In late May, a Japanese man working for a major Japanese electronics firm walked into work in Dalian. He didn’t walk out. The Asahi Shimbun reports that Chinese authorities detained him on suspicion of attempting to export rare-earth-processed products outside of China — the very same rare earths Beijing has been weaponizing against Tokyo for months. This is not a customs case. This is a hostage. Recall how we got here. On November 7, 2025, Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi told the Japanese National Diet that a Chinese armed assault on Taiwan involving warships and the use of force could constitute a “survival-threatening situation” — the legal trigger under Japan’s 2015 Legislation for Peace and Security that permits Tokyo to exercise collective self-defense. She said the quiet part out loud. Beijing heard it. What followed was a coercion campaign with no diplomatic ambiguity. Travel warnings against Japan. Standoffs around the Senkaku Islands. Joint Chinese-Russian air activity off the Sea of Japan. On January 6, 2026, the Chinese Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) banned dual-use exports to Japan tied to military end-use. In February 2026, Beijing tightened twice in a single month. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) spokesperson stated the purpose explicitly: to prevent Japan’s “rearmament and attempts to acquire nuclear weapons” — language designed to recast a sovereign democracy’s defense posture as historical revanchism. Then came the cargo strangulation. Chinese customs data confirm that shipments of terbium oxide and dysprosium oxide to Japan have stood at zero since November 2025. Yttrium oxide: negligible volumes since December. Heavy rare earth flow to Japan — for motors, magnets, semiconductors, defense systems — is no longer disrupted. It is severed. And now, a man in Dalian sits in a cell. Understand what this detention signals. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is not punishing a single engineer for paperwork violations. It is broadcasting to every Japanese employee, every multinational executive, every supply chain manager still operating inside the People’s Republic: your body is leverage. Your liberty is contingent. The line between commerce and hostage-taking has been formally erased. This pattern is not new. Since the 2014 Anti-Espionage Law and its 2023 expansion, at least 17 Japanese nationals have been detained on opaque “espionage” or national-security pretexts — pharmaceutical executives, friendship-society organizers, ordinary businesspeople. The evidence is classified. The trials are closed. The releases, when they come, are political transactions. What is new is the integration. Rare earth weaponization, dual-use export bans, military intimidation off Japanese coasts, and now the arbitrary detention of a Japanese citizen tied directly to the rare earth dispute — these are not separate Chinese policies. They are a single coordinated coercion package, calibrated to extract a retraction from Tokyo that Takaichi has refused to provide. At the Group of Seven (G7) summit in France in mid-June, Takaichi raised the Chinese export regime directly, voiced deep concern about the supply-chain impact on G7 economies, and proposed allied stockpile cooperation and joint reserves. Translation: Tokyo will not be coerced. Tokyo will harden. That is the correct answer. It is also why the cell door closed in Dalian. Condemn this clearly. The detention of a private citizen as an instrument of state-to-state pressure is not lawful enforcement. It is hostage diplomacy — the tactic of an authoritarian regime, not a modern state. The CCP has weaponized its own legal system against a foreign national to settle a political grievance over a democratic prime minister’s parliamentary remarks. Every government, every multinational, every chamber of commerce that pretends this is anything else is providing cover for the cage. Japan has done the harder work of decoupling. The United States, the European Union, Australia, and the United Kingdom should now accelerate it together — strategic stockpiles, non-red supply chains, processing capacity outside Chinese jurisdiction, and a unified declaration that arbitrary detention of any allied national triggers a coordinated response, not bilateral negotiation in the dark. Beijing did not lose a rare earth dispute. Beijing took a hostage to win one. ACI — Aric Chen | Insights

$MA keeps getting more attractive by the day. - EPS is compounding at a stellar 17.9% CAGR, yet the stock price has decoupled down to $477.68. - P/FCF down to 23.73, right above it's 10 year low. - $MA board authorized a $14B buyback in December. They bought 4M in shares in March. I can only imagine this will get bigger this quarter.