Thrilled to welcome @HyveXYZ to Arbitrum They’re turning real-time data into a shared, verifiable primitive - giving apps faster performance, lower infra overhead and more Excited to see Hyve tap Arbitrum’s speed, reliability and deep liquidity to help build the data economy

The launch of Aave v4 is not what it seems. It's the direct result of breaking down everything that was good about Aave. Let me expose why this is the case. 24h since AAVE v4 launched generated only 4M in deposits. This is a protocol with over 30 bil in TVL on Ethereum alone. That sits on v3, the one people actually trust and was built by the DAO. If you visit the main page of AAVE today, you'll be presented with: Aave App - an Aave Labs product Aave v4 - an Aave Labs product There was no actual demand for these products, except that they were created to generate income for Aave Labs. Since that went against the DAO interests, the founder and owner of Aave Labs did a hostile takeover by outvoting the other DAO members that protested against these initiatives. He then proceeded to pay himself via a rigged vote 50M in DAO funds to develop a roadmap including the above products. Initially, they wanted to play the DAO game, but since they couldn't get their way, they went ahead and broke the DAO. Now, Aave Labs tells users that every product they are building and 100% of its associated revenue will go to the DAO treasury. That's great, until you realize they control the DAO and can always vote to pay themselves whatever amounts they want. So instead of their products paying Aave Labs directly like they wanted initially, they now use a broken DAO as a cover to pay themselves whenever they want. Unsuspecting users believe everything Aave Labs is building is in the benefit of the DAO and the AAVE token, when in fact that's a smokescreen to syphon money quietly. This conflict of interest caused the recent Aave drama that saw key DAO service providers quit and leave. The ones that actually built and maintained v3 at over 30 bil in TVL. Aave Labs changed the Aave website, which they control, to benefit themselves, created the conflict (perhaps on purpose) so they can take over the DAO and do as they please. They succeeded. This is why we have v4 today. The ones against it were pushed out. If you scroll the Aave website you'll notice v3 gets no attention, besides some links. Moreso, they present v4 as the "pro" version. That's totally misleading. v3 is the actual product that was tested and held strong during times of stress, not v4 which is an untested product from a team that showed gross negligence in the past. For example, a user recently lost 50M using the Aave Labs swap function on their website. Imagine trying to buy a lot of AAVE on their own site and losing all your money. That's who is behind v4. The founder also bought a 30M mansion in one of the fanciest neighborhoods in London most recently. Aave Labs was thirsty for money and this was their solution. It worked. However, people will vote with their money. Time will tell how v4 will do, but I would never touch any product developed by Aave Labs, unless you want to risk your money. Like, share, and follow @duonine

Redemption liquidity is one of the major holdups of RWA adoption as identified by this great report. Some quick comments on the 3rd party solutions discussed: Pre-fund a stablecoin pool that buys tokens at NAV - using USDC directly means you'd be foregoing base yield, which isn't capital efficient - (manual) management implies operational overhead - limited by RWA issuer treasury Use market makers to buy tokens at NAV - market makers don't want to have exposure to long duration RWAs (or it'd be costly as they would need to hedge) Borrow against RWA tokens on DeFi lending markets - borrowable supply is impacted by lack of redemption liquidity itself - additionally, looping/leverage dry out the supply (e.g. @3FLabs looking to solve this) We've got something cooking here at @symbioticfi that seeks to address the shortcomings of approach 1 and 2 🧑‍🍳 Keep an eye out and find @0xhenrique_d at @blockworksDAS next week to discuss!

As the largest RWA market on Ethereum, Horizon offers a unique opportunity for integrators to enable stablecoin lending against traditional assets directly onchain, while providing instant liquidity for borrowers. No waiting. No barriers. Just liquidity.

Largely agree. We’ve been building at the convergence of DeFi and tradfi for more than five years and it’s clear that the pace and innovation in the vertical is accelerating

Most RWAs are just the same asset on new rails. Tokenized treasuries, tokenized stocks. They work, but they're not new. The RWAs I'm paying the most attention to are crypto native. Tokenization that actually enables new types of financing like GPU infrastructure, electricity markets, or wireless broadband. Not digital twins. New products that only exist because of tokenization, composable in DeFi from day one.

There have recently been some discussions on the ongoing role of L2s in the Ethereum ecosystem, especially in the face of two facts: * L2s' progress to stage 2 (and, secondarily, on interop) has been far slower and more difficult than originally expected * L1 itself is scaling, fees are very low, and gaslimits are projected to increase greatly in 2026 Both of these facts, for their own separate reasons, mean that the original vision of L2s and their role in Ethereum no longer makes sense, and we need a new path. First, let us recap the original vision. Ethereum needs to scale. The definition of "Ethereum scaling" is the existence of large quantities of block space that is backed by the full faith and credit of Ethereum - that is, block space where, if you do things (including with ETH) inside that block space, your activities are guaranteed to be valid, uncensored, unreverted, untouched, as long as Ethereum itself functions. If you create a 10000 TPS EVM where its connection to L1 is mediated by a multisig bridge, then you are not scaling Ethereum. This vision no longer makes sense. L1 does not need L2s to be "branded shards", because L1 is itself scaling. And L2s are not able or willing to satisfy the properties that a true "branded shard" would require. I've even seen at least one explicitly saying that they may never want to go beyond stage 1, not just for technical reasons around ZK-EVM safety, but also because their customers' regulatory needs require them to have ultimate control. This may be doing the right thing for your customers. But it should be obvious that if you are doing this, then you are not "scaling Ethereum" in the sense meant by the rollup-centric roadmap. But that's fine! it's fine because Ethereum itself is now scaling directly on L1, with large planned increases to its gas limit this year and the years ahead. We should stop thinking about L2s as literally being "branded shards" of Ethereum, with the social status and responsibilities that this entails. Instead, we can think of L2s as being a full spectrum, which includes both chains backed by the full faith and credit of Ethereum with various unique properties (eg. not just EVM), as well as a whole array of options at different levels of connection to Ethereum, that each person (or bot) is free to care about or not care about depending on their needs. What would I do today if I were an L2? * Identify a value add other than "scaling". Examples: (i) non-EVM specialized features/VMs around privacy, (ii) efficiency specialized around a particular application, (iii) truly extreme levels of scaling that even a greatly expanded L1 will not do, (iv) a totally different design for non-financial applications, eg. social, identity, AI, (v) ultra-low-latency and other sequencing properties, (vi) maybe built-in oracles or decentralized dispute resolution or other "non-computationally-verifiable" features * Be stage 1 at the minimum (otherwise you really are just a separate L1 with a bridge, and you should just call yourself that) if you're doing things with ETH or other ethereum-issued assets * Support maximum interoperability with Ethereum, though this will differ for each one (eg. what if you're not EVM, or even not financial?) From Ethereum's side, over the past few months I've become more convinced of the value of the native rollup precompile, particuarly once we have enshrined ZK-EVM proofs that we need anyway to scale L1. This is a precompile that verifies a ZK-EVM proof, and it's "part of Ethereum", so (i) it auto-upgrades along with Ethereum, and (ii) if the precompile has a bug, Ethereum will hard-fork to fix the bug. The native rollup precompile would make full, security-council-free, EVM verification accessible. We should spend much more time working out how to design it in such a way that if your L2 is "EVM plus other stuff", then the native rollup precompile would verify the EVM, and you only have to bring your own prover for the "other stuff" (eg. Stylus). This might involve a canonical way of exposing a lookup table between contract call inputs and outputs, and letting you provide your own values to the lookup table (that you would prove separately). This would make it easy to have safe, strong, trustless interoperability with Ethereum. It also enables synchronous composability (see: ethresear.ch/t/combining-pre… and ethresear.ch/t/synchronous-c… ). And from there, it's each L2's choice exactly what they want to build. Don't just "extend L1", figure out something new to add. This of course means that some will add things that are trust-dependent, or backdoored, or otherwise insecure; this is unavoidable in a permissionless ecosystem where developers have freedom. Our job should make to make it clear to users what guarantees they have, and to build up the strongest Ethereum that we can.

tempo might actually kill ethereum once it has more stablecoin liquidity than eth it’s literally over

The web built markets. Web3 built economies. But data, the substrate of all value, remains captive. Today marks a new phase for Hyve, starting with the release of our new website, documentation, and The Hot Data Manifesto: Hyve’s formal position paper, outlining why decentralized economies can’t exist without sovereign, real-time data primitives, and how Hyve is designed to make data composable. When data cannot be verified, aligned, or reused across protocols, it cannot form economies. It stays static, trapped in markets. Hyve changes this by introducing a sovereign, high-throughput data fabric enabling ecosystems to turn data into an economic primitive rather than a cost center. Finance became composable through smart contracts. Logic became composable through blockchains. Now, data becomes composable through Hyve.

The web built markets. Web3 built economies. But data, the substrate of all value, remains captive. Today marks a new phase for Hyve, starting with the release of our new website, documentation, and The Hot Data Manifesto: Hyve’s formal position paper, outlining why decentralized economies can’t exist without sovereign, real-time data primitives, and how Hyve is designed to make data composable. When data cannot be verified, aligned, or reused across protocols, it cannot form economies. It stays static, trapped in markets. Hyve changes this by introducing a sovereign, high-throughput data fabric enabling ecosystems to turn data into an economic primitive rather than a cost center. Finance became composable through smart contracts. Logic became composable through blockchains. Now, data becomes composable through Hyve.