Need a dev to figure out some things in a block chain
hey i really need some help to figure out a mining system of a new block chain which is getting hard for me to figure out plz cna any one help me out with it u can write to me in inbox thanks
hey i really need some help to figure out a mining system of a new block chain which is getting hard for me to figure out plz cna any one help me out with it u can write to me in inbox thanks
Before work, I came across a post from a guy, he was talking about a new way to make a bit of money
In about two hours, I managed to make $89, those who have more time can make more
He left the guide in a pinned post on his profile, u/totoer008, just click to check it out
It worked for me, so I decided to share, maybe it’ll help someone else too
Why are we still copy-pasting 40-character wallet addresses in 2026?
Idea: you do a small test transfer once → both wallets get a shared avatar/character. Next time you send, you just recognize the person visually instead of relying on the address.
Kind of like “pairing” wallets.
Would this actually reduce mistakes or scams, or is this unnecessary given things like ENS?

Hey r/ethdev,
I've been building Ethereum contracts for a while and kept running into the same friction: auditing manually, remembering Slither/Mythril flags, writing tests before implementation (or forgetting to), and juggling gas optimization passes on top of deployment scripts.
So I built **eth-agents** — a Claude Code plugin that gives you a team of 10 specialized AI agents, each with a single job.
---
**What it solves:**
- You forget to run a security audit → `"audit this contract"` triggers a full pipeline: Slither scan, manual pattern analysis, and if it finds Critical/High, a security specialist writes PoC exploit tests automatically
- TDD is painful → `"write tests first"` kicks off a strict loop: unit-test-engineer writes failing tests, contract-developer implements until they pass, max 5 iterations
- Gas optimization is tedious → `"optimize gas"` produces a before/after snapshot, applies one category at a time, and only hands off if the diff is positive
- Mainnet deploy anxiety → deploy always halts for your explicit confirmation before touching mainnet, no exceptions
---
**How it works:**
You describe what you want in plain English. An orchestrator agent routes your intent to the right pipeline. Agents coordinate automatically. You see progress in the Claude Code status bar.
```
you › audit this contract for reentrancy
⟠ orchestrator → routing to audit pipeline
⟠ auditor → static analysis + Slither scan
HIGH-1: releasePrize — winner not validated
HIGH-2: no ReentrancyGuard on external fns
⟠ security-specialist → PoC exploit simulation
✓ audit-report.md written · 10 findings · remediation for each
```
**Token efficiency:** ~55% savings via model routing (Haiku for simple tasks, Sonnet for implementation, Opus for security), prompt caching, and per-agent output constraints.
**Zero config.** Works with Foundry and Hardhat. Install and go:
```bash
claude plugin install eth-agents
```
It's open source (MIT). Happy to answer questions.
→ https://cayocan.github.io/eth-agents/
---

The collapse of FTX in late 2022 was a major turning point in the crypto market, and it’s a mix of poor management, risky financial practices, and lack of regulatory oversight. Here’s a clear breakdown:
FTX, under Sam Bankman-Fried, reportedly used customer deposits to fund risky trades at Alameda Research, the trading firm he also controlled. Essentially, money that users thought was safely held on the exchange was being lent to a related entity without proper transparency.
Alameda Research reportedly took highly leveraged positions in volatile tokens. When markets turned down, they faced massive losses, which FTX had indirectly guaranteed because of the intermingled funds.
FTX didn’t have proper internal controls, audits, or regulatory supervision. This allowed mismanagement and liquidity issues to go unnoticed until the firm faced a sudden cash crunch.
In early November 2022, a CoinDesk report revealed a large portion of Alameda’s balance sheet was in FTT (FTX’s own token). This spooked investors and counterparties, leading to:
FTX filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in November 2022. Sam Bankman-Fried was arrested and charged with fraud, mismanagement, and misleading investors and customers.
The FTX collapse wasn’t just a company failure — it shook confidence in centralized crypto platforms and accelerated the market’s focus on risk management, transparency, and decentralization.
Source: https://www.bitget.com/academy/what-caused-ftx-collapse-and-crypto-market-impact
Some distributed system designs explore embedding lightweight messaging or chat functionality directly into node software, allowing peers to communicate within the same environment used for synchronization and validation.
At first glance, this appears beneficial for coordination and visibility, especially in smaller or dynamic networks. However, integrating communication into node architecture raises several structural and security questions.
From a design perspective, node software is typically expected to remain deterministic and narrowly scoped around consensus-critical operations. Introducing messaging layers blurs this boundary:
At the same time, keeping communication entirely external introduces its own limitations:
This leads to a broader architectural question:
>
And if such communication is introduced:
>
We're open-sourcing Autonet on April 6 : a framework for decentralized AI model training and inference where verification, rewards, and governance happen on-chain.
Smart contract architecture:
| Contract | Purpose |
|---|---|
Project.sol |
AI project lifecycle, funding, model publishing, inference |
TaskContract.sol |
Task proposal, checkpoints, commit-reveal solution commitment |
ResultsRewards.sol |
Multi-coordinator Yuma voting, reward distribution, slashing |
ParticipantStaking.sol |
Role-based staking (Proposer 100, Solver 50, Coordinator 500, Aggregator 1000 ATN) |
ModelShardRegistry.sol |
Distributed model weights with Merkle proofs and erasure coding |
ForcedErrorRegistry.sol |
Injects known-bad results to test coordinator vigilance |
AutonetDAO.sol |
On-chain governance for parameter changes |
How it works:
Novel mechanisms:
ForcedErrorRegistry randomly injects known-bad results. If a coordinator approves them, they get slashed. Keeps coordinators honest.13+ Hardhat tests passing. Orchestrator runs complete training cycles locally.
Code: github.com/autonet-code Paper: github.com/autonet-code/whitepaper MIT License.
Interested in feedback on the contract architecture, especially the commit-reveal verification and the forced error testing pattern.
