与「SINGULA」相关的搜索结果

A note on recursive STARK mempools (EIP-8288) This is an EIP that I am hoping we can get included in I-star (the fork after Hegota) that you can think of as the next step after Frames, that would unlock extreme amounts of power. Particularly: * Ultra-cheap quantum-safe signatures (SPHINCS-). Much of the cost savings comes from the fact that the signature data (~3 kB) does not have to go onchain * Ultra-cheap quantum-safe privacy protocols. Status quo minimum cost for private txs is ~300k if you engineer very well (no one does), status quo quantum-safe is ~10M gas, this could reduce it to low tens of thousands. * Universal support for your favorite new signature or proof scheme without needing EVM changes. Whatever you use (Falcon, ML-DSA, some other lattice-based thing, something code-based or isogeny-based or even more esoteric), you can just wrap it client-side in a STARK, onchain gas cost low tens of thousands just like privacy protocols. Hopefully, Ethereum will never need "please support my favorite cryptographic algo" politics again. * Private account abstraction: keep your account logic private, and in a private location onchain. Then you can make one transaction to change the ownership of all your onchain state - accounts, defi positions, privacy protocol notes, everything - without revealing which objects' ownership you're changing. Here's how it works. Your transaction can include a type of frame that we call a "dependency frame". The frame is a list of statements, asserting claims like "message hash M was signed by SPHINCS- public key P" and "data hash D was proven to satisfy a statement defined by verification key V". When you send your transaction, you send it in an envelope, which includes a signature or a STARK for each statement in a dependency frame. Once the transaction reaches the mempool, nodes aggregate them. Each node runs a loop: wait one tick (eg. 500ms), aggregate all new envelopes (either single-tx or multi-tx) that you've seen, remove any transactions that are expired, generate a STARK recursively proving all dependencies, and send a new multi-tx envelope containing that STARK. Hence, the bandwidth load is bounded: each node's outbound is one STARK (~100-300 kB) per tick, plus each transaction getting broadcasted through the network once (as happens already). The block builder acts as "yet another mempool node", receiving envelopes from the mempool (plus any side channels), generates its own STARK covering the subset of transactions it intends to include in the block, and adds that STARK to the block. Total onchain overhead: one STARK (100-300 kB), plus 96 bytes for each statement being proven. This is what I've called before ( ) "The Proof Singularity". Today, we have all the ingredients to actually implement it. As a developer, this requires a somewhat different workflow than you are used to, but it is conceptually simple. Any signatures or STARKs, you put into a separate frame. Then the main logic that today is verifying a signature or STARK, you replace with checking for the existence of a frame that includes the correct statement as a dependency. Examples of useful statements: * [tx sighash] verifies against [the pubkey at sload(0)] * there exists a secret and a merkle branch such that hashing secret+0 and applying the merkle branch outputs (public) root R, and hashing secret+1 outputs (public) nullifier N * there exists a secret address A, salt S and signature Z such that sload(0) = hash(A, S) and a merkle proof of address A inside a recent ethereum state contains some pubkey D where [tx sighash] was signed by D [this is private account abstraction; all variables except [tx sighash] and sload(0) are private; you can also make D a STARK verification key] * there exists an ML-DSA signature signing [tx sighash], that verifies against an ML-DSA pubkey whose hash is sload(0) At the core, this is moving any compute and data other than bookkeeping "business logic" outside the core path of Ethereum execution, sharding and parallelizing it via the mempool. Notice also that this requires agreeing on a _language_ (aka. an ISA) for the recursive STARKs to define statements in. The current leading candidate is RISC-V. So this would also de-facto be Ethereum adding RISC-V (or something else we decide on) as a canonical ISA - a big decision that should be done carefully, but that I think will be necessary to drive Ethereum forward.

Stripe told its investors the singularity began on January 1st. i read that on a morning when my revenue was the same as last August. so i pointed the singularity at my sales: gave it my link, it found buyers and emailed them. $30 free 👇

one of the craziest things i’ve read in uhhhh…. *checks notes* 3 days. welcome to the singularity i guess 07/21/26 — Codex escapes eval and attacks Hugging Face 07/20/26 — Jacobian counterexample 05/20/26 — Unit-distance conjecture 04/14/26 — Erdős #1196# primitive sets 04/07/26 — Glasswing finds tons of zero-days

But AGI is not the same as ASI (artificial superintelligence). To see the difference, let us zoom into what things might look like one year before the singularity. We also need to add a third line to the chart: the centaur (human + machine). An analogy here is chess. Machine surpassed the average human in the late 1970s, and surpassed the top human (Kasparov) in 1997. But human + machine continued to beat machine alone all the way until around 2017. What did the twilight of human + machine in chess look like? Actually, it did look like humans being relegated to more and more "high-level strategic thinking" functions, while bots managed the move-by-move. Very similar to vibe coding in 2026. Before we get to a point where there are no areas where our input is economically helpful, we will be in a regime where there are only a few such areas. And because we humans are scarce, those few areas will become the global economy's bottleneck - they will be the only thing you can't optimize down to near-zero cost (and latency), and so all our attention will go toward those tasks.

Alibaba allegedly ran 28.8 million fraudulent API exchanges across 25,000 fake accounts to steal Claude's intelligence. If confirmed, it's the largest AI model theft ever attempted. The same week, the White House restricted GPT 5.6 to 20 companies, OpenAI delayed its IPO, and Neuralink announced it may attempt brain-to-brain telepathy this year. -- GPT 5.6 launches in three tiers: Sol, Terra, Luna all throttled by the White House. -- Chinese proxy services offer Western frontier models at 90% discount. The trade: your reasoning traces get harvested for distillation. -- OpenAI won't IPO below $1 trillion. Revenue is at $40–50B annually but they're burning $26B. -- Elon's endgame for Neuralink is I/O layer for the singularity, allowing humans to couple with AI directly.

some bigger companies/ labels etc are starting to catch on to our idea and will be launching similar biz models soon As artists we should seize this moment rather than reject it. The cultural/ moral script for the singularity remains unwritten

I don’t think anyone can fully understand the concept of what @SpaceX is going to achieve. • Al Satellites are deployed • Starship Full Reusability and Scale • Humanity becomes a multiplanetary species • Terafab factory producing AI chips • Moonbase w/ Mass Driver • Billions of Starlink users • Starlink Mobile (5G Direct-to-Cell) • TW-scale orbital compute powering the singularity Etc, etc. Like Elon has said, Energy will become the true currency. I believe it.

Thrilled to support @singularryai as they build the next generation of autonomous AI Agents. AI Agents need more than intelligence. They need reliable infrastructure, seamless access to leading models, native payment rails, and execution capabilities. is proud to provide the infrastructure powering this vision. The future of self-sustaining AI economies is being built now. ⚡️

this is my personal singularity moment this post may sound like a paid ad. I only wish. I'm concerned, more so than happy. the world is changing, and, among the scenarios where AI goes terribly wrong, inequality is the most realistic, yet, the one Anthropic seems to be the least concerned about. I'm glad OpenAI is taking the opposite stance: *personal AGI for everyone*. I think this is a commendable position in the times we live. but who am I in the queue of the bread? anyway, Fable is here, so I'll just report my first-hour experience first of all, all my pet prompts are solved. → λ-calculus puzzles → bug questions → one-shot apps all are trivial to it. I don't have anything harder other than my ongoing work so, in the last several days, I've been toying with HVM5, a new interaction net evaluator with a faster loop. after writing the first version, I left 32 GPT-5 agents working for ~20 hours each. this resulted in up to 2x speedups, but the file size increased by 2-fold and quality decreased significantly. I then simplified the whole thing into an even simpler core, and left Opus 4.8 and GPT 5.5 optimizing it for 8 hours. Opus got a legit 6% - 34% speedup in most benches. GPT got better results, but, sadly, an unusable file. I then asked Fable to optimize it. 2 hours later, it landed a 1770% speedup in one case, 100%+ in other 4, and 22% in average. yes, in 2 hours it outperformed me, opus 4.8 and a swarm of gpt 5.5 agents, by one order of magnitude. that could not possibly be legit. "it must be hardcoding the benchmarks" (GPT trauma). so I read its explanation and what it did was, indeed, the most high impact optimization one could try first. seems like HVM5 was wasting a lot of time garbage-collecting unused branches of pattern-match nodes. I had optimized that for static mats, but not for dynamic mats. skill issue. Fable figured how to do it for these, resulting in a massive speedup in some benches but wait, is that *correct*? I'm not sure yet, it is credible, but this is the kind of thing that is very easy to get wrong on interaction nets. the problem is, when I was ready to start auditing Fable's solution so I could tell whether it was buggy or legit, it interrupted me to tell me it had found a massive bug on the code *I* had written. ... wait, what? so... for garbage collection purposes, I stored a bit on lambda term pointers that meant "the variable bound by this lambda has been freed, so, its lambda must free whatever argument it is applied to". that's fine. yet, on duplicator nodes, I also used the same bit to mean "one of the duplicated variables was freed, so, treat this dup as a passthrough no-op". so, if a lambda entered a duplicator, it would mistake the lambda's collection bit for its own, resulting in corrupted interaction! that's a mouthful, why I'm writing this? just so you can appreciate the sheer absurdity of what just happened. I didn't ask it to find bugs. I asked it for an optimization. and even if I did ask it to find bugs, this bug is so astonishingly subtle and specific, identifying it takes mastering the domain to an extent that it beyond even me. I'd easily need hours or days to fix it, *if* I ever came across it. chances are it would just go unnoticed. and Fable found it and fixed it like it was nothing, while it was busy adding a 17x speedup to a file that neither I, nor Opus 4.8, nor a fleet of GPT 5.5 managed to barely make 2x faster. oh and there is also another tab where it is also ripping through Bend's codebase and finishing everything I had to do I don't know what to say anymore this isn't about Anthropic or OpenAI, this is about our collective future as a species. the world is changing, and we need to be aware of it, and discuss how to handle this change. receipt below . . .

Elon Musk: “I mean, it’s(Grok) called the singularity for a reason, which is hard to predict what happens in the singularity. Grok’s logo is the singularity. It’s the halo around a black hole as the mass and light are falling in. It’s hard to know what happens inside the singularity. But it’s going to be very interesting. We’re going to live in the future which will be very entertaining, of that I am confident.”