与「quantum」相关的搜索结果

Been following @quipnetwork for a while now, and it’s clear they’re building something much bigger than another DePIN token. They’re turning idle compute into a truly open global marketplace CPUs, GPUs, and eventually QPUs right when AI demand is exploding and centralized providers are becoming bottlenecks. Already impressive: • 160+ PFLOPS live • 500+ active nodes • 200K+ quantum resistant wallets • $1M+ secured • 13K+ users pre mainnet The $QUIP infrastructure is scaling while the network is still early. In a world where compute is the new oil, a neutral, decentralized alternative feels important.

Honestly this decade from 2020-2030 might be the most goated in human history. - Scaling massive reusable rockets for orbital compute with $RKLB to $SPCX. - on the cusp of ASI and recursive learning with Anthropic and OpenAI - Backflipping Boston Dynamics and Unitree humanoids to replace the human workforce - Star Wars laser beams from $EOS.ASX to AI DC lasers like $LITE. - Waymo and $TSLA self driving cars everywhere in urban cities - and we get industry Quantum commercialization end of decade This is kinda crazy to be an investor in this timeframe. Feels like every movie from the Star Wars Death Star to Skynet is coming to life. What’s next?

A List of Robotics Stocks: Humanoids $TSLA Tesla $XPEV Xpeng $AGLT Agility $XIACF Xiaomi $HYMTF Hyundai Sensors $VPG Vishay Precision $OUST Ouster $ARBE Arbe Robotics $MVIS MicroVision $AUR Aurora $CGNX Cognex $INVZ Innoviz Chips $NVDA Nvidia $AMBQ Ambiq $AMBA Ambarella $INDI indie Logistics $AMZN Amazon $SYM Symbotic Deep Sea Robotics $KRKNF Kraken Robotics $OII Oceaneering Healthcare Robotics $ISRG Intuitive Surgical $SYK Stryker $MDT Medtronic $PRCT PROCEPT Industrial Robotics $HON Honeywell $TER Teradyne $LECO Lincoln Electric Robotics Automation $PEGA Pegasystems $ROK Rockwell Automation $ABBN ABB $ZBRA Zebra Technologies $CGNX Cognex $PATH UiPath Defense Robotics $AVAV AeroVironment $KTOS Kratos $LMT Lockheed Martin $NOC Northrop Grumman $BA Boeing $GD General Dynamics Consumer & B2B Robotics $XIACF Xiaomi $RR RichTech Robotics $SERV Serve Robotics Batteries $EOSE Eos Energy $QS QuantumScape $MVST Microvast $FLNC Fluence $KULR KULR $SLDP Solid Power $AMPX Amprius

Scientists have long made predictions about Q-Day, the supposed date when quantum computers will be able to break the sophisticated cryptography systems on which modern societies rely. John Reed explains why organisations believe it may be drawing near.

Long post. Most will scroll past before realize what is hidden in it. That is part of the filter. This is not one idea. It is a trail. Physics shows up. Belief shows up. The body shows up. Responsibility shows up. At first, they may look like separate rooms. They are not. They are connected doors. Read slowly. The connections run deeper than they first appear. A person can spend years looking for answers and still refuse the one thing that would actually change the result. That is the part people usually do not want to see. They think the problem is lack of information. More books, more lectures, more techniques, more quantum mechanics, more explanations. But information does not change a life if the belief underneath remains the same. Before looking at physics experiments, this needs to be clear. In this view, quantum mechanics is not mainly about technology, weapons, machines, or theories. The real point is to understand how the universe works so a person can create the reality they want in their own life. But there is a trap here too. A person can hear “consciousness is fundamental” and turn it into another slogan. Another belief to defend. Another thing to repeat without changing anything. The words changed, but the structure did not. So the question cannot stop at, “What is consciousness made of?” That question matters, but it can become too abstract too fast. People start adding extra machinery, extra assumptions, extra invisible interactions, and then act as if the problem has been solved. But adding more parts does not automatically explain experience. It only moves the question somewhere else. The deeper question has to become operational first. What kind of system can sustain consciousness? What must a physical system do to keep a coherent internal perspective alive through noise, change, error, memory, pain, emotion, and time? That question points to what actually happens when consciousness appears, weakens, breaks, returns, or stabilizes. It does not ask for a slogan. It asks for a process. A conscious system has to keep a model of “me,” “now,” and “the world” intact while everything inside and outside it is changing. The body changes. The brain changes. The chemistry changes. The environment changes. Memory updates. Prediction errors arrive. Emotion interrupts. The senses keep correcting the picture. And still, something holds. There is a point of view. There is a world being experienced from somewhere. That does not fully solve the metaphysical hard problem. A skeptic can still ask, “Why should stable modeling feel like anything at all?” That is fair. A thermostat regulates. A computer processes information. A brain models the world. Those are not automatically the same thing as felt experience. But the question becomes deeper. Maybe experience is not a substance added on top of the system. It is what the system is from the inside when the right kind of self maintaining stability is achieved. Once a system preserves a living perspective across body, memory, prediction, and world, that perspective is not something it watches from outside. It is the only vantage point available to it. That is where the operational question opens the metaphysical one. Consciousness is the base of everything. Matter is not the foundation. Matter is a manifestation of consciousness. The fundamental state is the wave. What appears as matter is one expression of that deeper state. But then comes the practical problem. People hear this and still do not want to change their beliefs. If the beliefs do not change, nothing changes. A person can study for years and still produce the same life because the inner position stayed untouched. This becomes clear in a lecture room. You can explain the same thing fifty times, three hours each time, for years. The person listens, but does not move one millimeter. Five years later, the same belief is still there. So how could the result be different? It cannot. Study is supposed to mean learning. Learning means, “I did not know this before. Now I know it. Because I know it, I change my behavior. I change my consciousness according to what I learned.” If that does not happen, what was the point of studying? It is like reading the manual of a car while continuing to destroy the car. The manual explains what needs to be done, but the person keeps driving the same way and then acts surprised when the car stops. But what was the manual for? People often approach new ideas with an automatic reflex of rejection instead of genuine consideration. One point is raised and dismissed. Another follows and receives the same response. When this pattern continues, no new possibility is tested or allowed to land. Discernment is necessary, but when every suggestion is rejected before it is examined, real change becomes nearly impossible. The same requests keep coming. The credit card. The overdraft. The contract. Month after month, year after year, the person wants a different result, but the state behind the result does not change. In this view, everything that happens in a person’s life is connected to the consciousness they carry. If a person believes in problems, problems appear. If a person believes in possibility, possibilities appear. Imagine someone stuck in mud, holding onto it as if it were gold. Someone pulls them out, but as soon as they let go, the person jumps back in. Why? Because in their consciousness, the mud is still gold. The location changed for a second, but the perception did not. Only when the state of consciousness changes can they actually be helped. Until then, every rescue is temporary. The same applies to relationships. There is a process. It involves bio chemistry, neurotransmitters, and what the person feels. Handled properly, it works. Handled wrongly, it breaks. But many people hear the process and still say, “That cannot be done.” Then how can the result appear if the process is rejected? It is like making a chocolate cake. Follow the recipe ratios, temperatures, and the cake works. Change the ingredients carelessly, and there is no cake. For a cake, everyone understands this. But in life, when not following the law produces suffering, people still argue with the process. So the question remains. What is the problem with changing what you think? It looks like ego. It becomes “what I think” against “what is being explained.” The person holds onto the old belief because admitting the new one would mean letting go of being right. Even when the process is explained clearly, the old belief returns immediately. Someone might say, “But I was taught that I should not want too much,” or “Good things only come after I have struggled enough.” The conditioning reasserts itself before the new understanding can take root. There it is. A belief from childhood, family, culture, grandmother, great grandmother, another century, still deciding the person’s life today. Science and experience may show that it does not work. The person may be frustrated, repeating the same result, and still say, “No, someone else has to take initiative. I have to wait.” Who said that? Where was this written as a cosmic law? It was said by tradition, by conditioning, by people repeating what they received without checking if it produced happiness. This applies to everything. A person receives the explanation clearly. “Do this, this, and this.” In the moment, they agree. Then they walk out the door and do the opposite. Why deceive the person trying to help you? If you mislead your therapist, lawyer, or accountant, you do not win. You just make the help useless. If a person resists even that, imagine what happens when the subject touches the deepest layers of meaning and faith. Many hold stories and interpretations passed down through generations that once gave life structure and certainty. When a clearer and deeper understanding becomes available, some may hear it yet still continue living as if the older framework remains the final truth. Whole civilizations are built on stories. Ideas about life, death, work, women, guilt, punishment, rest, and salvation sit on top of them. So when the story is questioned, the person feels their whole structure being touched. To bring about real change in life, the person has to align with the basic principles of how the universe operates in this view. That requires shifting the state of consciousness and the underlying paradigm. Everything is under the paradigm. If the paradigm does not change, nothing truly changes. The person remains dependent on someone else to keep fixing what they continue to create from the same inner state. This is why resonance is meant for liberation, not as permanent support. Its purpose is to help the person shift their consciousness so they can stand on their own. When used this way, money may begin to flow and situations may improve. But if the thoughts and beliefs underneath remain the same, the old patterns eventually return and recreate the same problems. There is also a deeper spiritual point here. A real connection with God, the divine, the higher self, or the sacred within does not make a person smaller. It should make the person more honest, responsible, awake, and capable of love. The problem is not faith. The problem is when inherited fear, guilt, or identity freezes around faith and gets mistaken for the living connection itself. That is why full responsibility can feel threatening. It does not have to destroy faith. It can purify it. It removes the excuse, but not the sacred. It returns creative responsibility to the individual while allowing the inner connection with higher power to deepen instead of staying trapped inside old programming. There was a young man who understood this after only four months of doing this inner work. He came from heavy conditioning, but saw the mechanism. He realized the role his own consciousness had been playing in shaping his experience, and that he had been sabotaging himself through it. Once he saw that, he took the beliefs he had carried for years and threw them away. That is change. Now take illness. In this view, every illness has a psychosomatic dimension alongside its biological expression. Physical conditions often reflect deeper inner states. When it is suggested that certain patterns of inner resistance or avoidance can contribute to physical symptoms, strong objection usually appears. But test it yourself. Deliberately give space to inner resistance. Feed the feeling of not wanting to engage with life or responsibility, and observe what happens in the body over the following days. The resistance is intense because it brings the role of one’s inner state back into awareness. The work is to question the beliefs. List what you believe about money, health, relationships, work, sales, the body, and the future. Then compare the belief with the result. If the belief is not questioned and changed, the result is zero. Relationships expose this faster. When the subject is metaphysics, many people let it pass. But when the subject is male and female conditioning, the room heats up. Touch the beliefs around men, women, initiative, control, guilt, and blame, and people react instantly. This same pattern appears in how people treat others. Someone may speak of spiritual values while still holding contempt or judgment toward certain groups. The contradiction is not always obvious to the person. It stems from old stories absorbed long ago. Those stories continue to shape how the person sees and treats others through tone, assumptions, and prejudice. This is not rare. Old beliefs do not remain only in the mind. They turn into behavior. When this inner work begins opening the unconscious, what is inside starts coming out. If there is mud inside, mud comes out. This is why some people say they started the process and now have more problems. Fear, guilt, anger, prejudice, laziness, and old beliefs do not disappear just because someone pressed play yesterday. The cleaning can take time. It may last one month, two months, six months, a year, or longer. While the old material is still coming out, results tend to appear in pieces. The bigger shifts usually come once the cleaning reaches a certain point. Many people want the benefits, but they do not want the study, questioning, or inner change needed to hold those results. That is imagination trapped in place. But the principle is simple in this view. Your consciousness participates in shaping your reality and continues to do so. Change an inch in consciousness and reality shifts an inch. Change a mile in consciousness and reality shifts a mile. Expansion creates expansion. If you believe you can earn one thousand, you earn one thousand. If you believe you can earn ten thousand, ten thousand becomes possible. If you believe you can earn one million, then one million is not a different category. It is still energy. The number is not the obstacle. The belief is. This is why real help cannot stay as rescue forever. At first, someone may heal, fix, rescue, and intervene. But after years, the same pattern appears. The person receives the benefit but does not evolve. The money comes, the illness improves, but consciousness does not move. Then the helper realizes they are only postponing the consequence. So they stop being a crutch and start teaching. Because if the person does not understand, the same pattern continues here or on the other side. People resist quantum mechanics because they sense where it leads. If consciousness is involved in reality, then responsibility comes back to the person. There is no place to hide behind fate, blame, family, society, or chance. Even biology can be read through that question. A living cell has been shown producing laser light. Not a whole organ. Not a brain. One cell. If one living cell can organize light in such a precise way, imagine a brain with billions of neurons and countless connections. Can the human being release energy too? Yes, through consciousness. A cell can emit organized light. A human being, with a developed consciousness, can direct energy in a much greater way. But then the mind keeps collapsing the problem. There is a quantum effect where continuous observation can keep a system from changing state. Translated into ordinary life, if the person keeps staring at the debt, the debt remains. If the person keeps staring at illness, illness remains. If the person keeps staring at lack of work, lack remains. “When will the money come to pay the debt?” Never, while the whole consciousness is fixed on the debt. “When will I get a job?” Never, while the whole consciousness is fixed on not having one. “When will I leave the hole?” Never, while the person keeps observing the hole. Trying too hard from the wrong state can keep the person trapped. The person thinks effort is solving the problem, but the attention is still feeding the same condition. Sometimes problems move because people accidentally stop focusing on them. For a while, the problem is not being observed with the same intensity. Then things move because the focus loosened. That is why a simple instruction can be powerful. Watch films that hold your attention. Comedies, dramas, anything that takes the focus off the problem. But even that meets resistance. A person hears that laughter and endorphins can help the body, and then says they could not find a single comedy they liked. Healing cannot be separated from consciousness. A person may arrive with a serious illness and want a miracle. But if the illness was built through resentment, anger, guilt, fear, and years of inner pressure, then the real work is not only physical. The person has to change the state that built the condition. Each situation has to be seen as a whole. If a store is failing, it may not be only the store, the economy, the decoration, or the sales process. You have to look at the people involved, the relationships, the history, and the whole field around the situation. The system is built so people do not understand what reality is made of. As long as things are presented as mysteries that cannot be questioned, people are less likely to look into how they actually work. Once someone understands the atom, the rest begins to open. Matter is not so solid anymore. Reality is not just hard objects separated from each other. It becomes information, energy, relation, and response. That is why non locality matters. If all particles remain connected, then nothing is truly isolated. The whole universe is one entangled system. What happens in one place does not stay completely separate from what happens elsewhere. When problems appear in one part of the world, they are not truly isolated from the rest. In this view, events reverberate through the whole field. To claim complete separation from what happens elsewhere contradicts the interconnected nature of reality itself. The same inconsistency appears when those who profit from outdated systems blame the public for pollution while suppressing cleaner technologies that could reduce harm. In this view, one cannot claim separation while benefiting from the structures that create the problem. Everything is connected. Experiments with entangled particles show correlations that do not behave like ordinary local contact. One particle is measured here, and the other responds there. The information does not travel in the normal way through space, because relativity says nothing can travel faster than light. Yet the correlation appears. So what do people do with that? They use quantum principles to develop technology. Quantum computers. Quantum encryption. Quantum communication. They build products from the very principles they deny when consciousness enters the discussion. That is not simple ignorance anymore. That is convenience. If information is stored in the field and can be accessed and transferred, then resonance becomes sensitive because the result becomes measurable. Someone asks for a result, the information is transferred, and something changes. But will the system allow that kind of experiment to be done freely? Probably not. Because once the deeper potentials of consciousness and information are recognized and measured, they would exceed the limits of the current accepted framework. Strong evidence that consciousness can directly influence outcomes would force a shift the existing structure is not ready to allow. The resonance does not depend on a huge physical machine. The information is there. It is accessed. It is transferred. If the result appears, the old explanation starts to break. But people also sabotage the result. Someone may ask for a higher level of excellence, but not fully understand what they are inviting in. That force carries a way of thinking, feeling, acting, and deciding. It wants movement, execution, and the highest expression of itself. But when it enters a person’s life, it often collides with comfort zones, old beliefs, fear, approval seeking, and small habits. And then everything stops. The person says, “Nothing happened.” But something did happen. The archetype arrived and pushed toward expansion. The person hit the brakes with all their strength. If the person was moving at ten miles per hour, the archetype comes in wanting one hundred. The person panics and steps on the brake completely. So the system freezes. Not because the archetype failed. Because the person refused the level of action that came with it. If someone asks for excellence, they cannot keep living from mediocrity. A great scientist wants to study. A great athlete wants to train. A great business mind wants to build. The force comes with movement. That does not fit laziness, delay, comfort, excuses, or “this is good enough.” People ask for the top, but someone at the top is not there by accident. That person works more, trains more, studies more, sacrifices more, and refuses the average standard. So when that information enters, it demands alignment. If the person refuses alignment, the result blocks. That is imagination trapped in place again. The person does not want to study, learn, understand the laws, or question beliefs. They want to make requests and receive results as if the universe were a vending machine. But reality does not work according to what a person prefers. It works according to law. If the process is followed, the result comes. If the process is rejected, the result does not stabilize. The knowledge is already laid out. The path is not hidden. It is in the person’s hands. The only question is whether they will use it. Because receiving knowledge increases responsibility. The more a person understands, the more they are required to act from that understanding. If they know and do not act, they have to suppress what they know. And suppressing consciousness has a cost. The higher the consciousness, the greater the responsibility to live according to it. If the person receives more and still tries to remain small, the pressure turns inward. What is not lived becomes blocked. What is blocked becomes weight. And that weight eventually appears somewhere. So the point is simple. The more consciousness a person has, the more they have to do with it. Because if they do not, the same consciousness they refused to express becomes the force that turns against them.

The top crypto and financial news headlines today👇 Tech selloff drags crypto lower as Strategy buys $35M bitcoin:native. Is a further price decrease on Bitcoin inevitable? THE MAJORS —— US signs executive orders setting 2031 deadline for post-quantum migration. Michael Saylor's Strategy acquired 520 BTC for $35 million ALT COINS & STOCKS —— @Pumpfun New bounty feature covered by NY Post after humiliate themselves for money. MegaETH's solana:megaA5QDK1qLXtjpvg9oCFMvxT9d5BCMrVTBddnM5kV token ~$14M unlock on Jun 23 will represent ~33% of supply. @solana remains the top chain for USDC activity, processing 22.7M transactions last week and holding the #1# spot for 7 straight weeks. AI —— Google bankrolls @A24 to build AI filmmaker tools. XRP Ledger now supports agentic payments with x402 NEW LAUNCHES —— Charles Schwab plans to launch S&P 500 prediction markets with Cboe. CRIME —— Polymarket paid creators to stage $1.9M in fake winning bets on dummy sites. (story via ,) Notorious 'jaredfromsubway' MEV bot drained for roughly $7.5 million in counter-MEV honeypot More stories linked in next thread...

This year, the EF is decreasing its budget by roughly 40%, which entails some difficult decisions. The goal of the decreases was set out in the Treasury Management Policy last year: the EF is transitioning into being a long-term-oriented endowment-based organization, shifting from its pre-2026 average of spending ~15% of its remaining funds each year, toward a post-2030 target of ~5% per year. Often, when an organization goes through something like this, people try to pretend that nothing of great value was lost, that it is an efficiency increase, that the only people cut are unproductive dead weight, and everyone else stopped partying, studied the blade, entered cracked S-tier beast mode, and this was sufficient to make up for the downside. I will not try to pretend this. I respect my EF colleagues far too much to pretend that there was not much that is lost. They are brilliant people. They are dedicated engineers of whom some have worked on the Ethereum protocol for nearly a decade. They have brought a bright light to the Ethereum ecosystem with their code, their words, their warmth as human beings and their actions. My dearest hope is that they find a path that brings them fulfillment and happiness whether inside Ethereum or outside. Hopefully many will be able to bring their excellent talents and mindset to the wider Ethereum ecosystem, or the even wider CROPS world. Instead, I will try to explain what *are* some of the grand sacrifices being made. The Ethereum Strawmap is no small thing. It is an extremely ambitious undertaking seeking to replace and augment almost every part of the protocol - consensus, proofs, privacy, account model, state, and more. This is the third iteration of Ethereum, in the same way that the Merge was the second, even if the shipping style is less Big Bang and more one-piece-at-a-time. On top of this, the EF is increasing its role in the Access Layer. We are not compromising on Ethereum being a Deeply Impressive protocol, something worthy of its place in a world with quantum computing, rockets to Mars and powerful biotech and AI, and capable of meeting the challenges that this era will bring. Some of the deficit will be recovered through more work happening outside the EF. But not all. So what are the grand sacrifices that will enable a leaner effort to accomplish all of this? I will give a few examples (though far from an exhaustive list): * The multi-client model will shift in the direction of multiple clients existing less for _redundancy_, and more for _specialization_. Up to this point, redundancy has been the main security strategy: if one client has a bug, if it has less than 33%, the chain keeps going and does not even stop finalizing. We are increasingly exploring moving more pieces of the protocol to a different security strategy: AI-assisted formal verification. Some smaller pieces of Ethereum (eg. BLS libraries) have worked this way already for a long time. But soon many more parts of Ethereum will likely function on this model. This may greatly reduce resource requirements of shipping a large number of EIPs. The resources saved by client teams can ideally instead be used to better serve different specialized user needs, including EF Access Layer goals. * PSE (Privacy and Scaling Explorations) is winding down as a unit. The number of people working on ZKPs for privacy and scaling is probably as high as ever, but they are working less on "exploration" and more on *implementing* ZKP-based privacy and scaling into the Protocol and Access Layer * Devcon will likely over time become smaller-scale, somewhat more spartan, much lower-deficit than previous years, in addition to other changes in vision in line with the Mandate. * Fewer beyond-Ethereum megaprojects coming from EF. As I announced earlier this year, I am taking on some of the responsibility of doing projects in this category that I consider valuable with my personal funds. * EF institutional work is reducing in scope, specializing more specifically on creating replicable test cases of highly CROPS-friendly deployments, even if at smaller scale. These do not explain all departures; in some cases they do not explain departures at all and rather explain _reduced need for new spending_. But they are a large part of the strategy at play. In the longer term, I personally favor a "soft lean-and-done" approach to Ethereum: once the Strawmap is completed, generally stick to security fixes and small high-value changes, and have a much higher bar for considering new feature additions to the protocol. This allows Ethereum to remain capture-resistant without demanding very large budgets. Learn less from multimillion-line-of-code behemoth projects, more from bitcoin. The past years have been a challenging era for Ethereum. However, the ecosystem is adapting, both inside the EF and outside, and I am confident that Ethereum is very well-positioned to succeed and thrive.

This year, the EF is decreasing its budget by roughly 40%, which entails some difficult decisions. The goal of the decreases was set out in the Treasury Management Policy last year: the EF is transitioning into being a long-term-oriented endowment-based organization, shifting from its pre-2026 average of spending ~15% of its remaining funds each year, toward a post-2030 target of ~5% per year. Often, when an organization goes through something like this, people try to pretend that nothing of great value was lost, that it is an efficiency increase, that the only people cut are unproductive dead weight, and everyone else stopped partying, studied the blade, entered cracked S-tier beast mode, and this was sufficient to make up for the downside. I will not try to pretend this. I respect my EF colleagues far too much to pretend that there was not much that is lost. They are brilliant people. They are dedicated engineers of whom some have worked on the Ethereum protocol for nearly a decade. They have brought a bright light to the Ethereum ecosystem with their code, their words, their warmth as human beings and their actions. My dearest hope is that they find a path that brings them fulfillment and happiness whether inside Ethereum or outside. Hopefully many will be able to bring their excellent talents and mindset to the wider Ethereum ecosystem, or the even wider CROPS world. Instead, I will try to explain what *are* some of the grand sacrifices being made. The Ethereum Strawmap is no small thing. It is an extremely ambitious undertaking seeking to replace and augment almost every part of the protocol - consensus, proofs, privacy, account model, state, and more. This is the third iteration of Ethereum, in the same way that the Merge was the second, even if the shipping style is less Big Bang and more one-piece-at-a-time. On top of this, the EF is increasing its role in the Access Layer. We are not compromising on Ethereum being a Deeply Impressive protocol, something worthy of its place in a world with quantum computing, rockets to Mars and powerful biotech and AI, and capable of meeting the challenges that this era will bring. Some of the deficit will be recovered through more work happening outside the EF. But not all. So what are the grand sacrifices that will enable a leaner effort to accomplish all of this? I will give a few examples (though far from an exhaustive list): * The multi-client model will shift in the direction of multiple clients existing less for _redundancy_, and more for _specialization_. Up to this point, redundancy has been the main security strategy: if one client has a bug, if it has less than 33%, the chain keeps going and does not even stop finalizing. We are increasingly exploring moving more pieces of the protocol to a different security strategy: AI-assisted formal verification. Some smaller pieces of Ethereum (eg. BLS libraries) have worked this way already for a long time. But soon many more parts of Ethereum will likely function on this model. This may greatly reduce resource requirements of shipping a large number of EIPs. The resources saved by client teams can ideally instead be used to better serve different specialized user needs, including EF Access Layer goals. * PSE (Privacy and Scaling Explorations) is winding down as a unit, and its underlying task (working on ZKP and related tech to support privacy and scaling) is shifting from an "exploration" strategy to a "build specific things we know are important" strategy, which requires less resources. * Devcon will likely over time become smaller-scale, somewhat more spartan, much lower-deficit than previous years, in addition to other changes in vision in line with the Mandate. * Fewer beyond-Ethereum megaprojects coming from EF. As I announced earlier this year, I am taking on some of the responsibility of doing projects in this category that I consider valuable with my personal funds. * EF institutional work is reducing in scope, specializing more specifically on creating replicable test cases of highly CROPS-friendly deployments, even if at smaller scale. These do not explain all departures; in some cases they do not explain departures at all and rather explain _reduced need for new spending_. But they are a large part of the strategy at play. In the longer term, I personally favor a "soft lean-and-done" approach to Ethereum: once the Strawmap is completed, generally stick to security fixes and small high-value changes, and have a much higher bar for considering new feature additions to the protocol. This allows Ethereum to remain capture-resistant without demanding very large budgets. Learn less from multimillion-line-of-code behemoth projects, more from bitcoin. The past years have been a challenging era for Ethereum. However, the ecosystem is adapting, both inside the EF and outside, and I am confident that Ethereum is very well-positioned to succeed and thrive.