В Monad опровергли плагиат исходного кода Aptos

cryptonews.ruPublished on 2024-11-20Last updated on 2025-02-20

Сооснователь Monad Джеймс Хансакер резко ответил на заявление директора по исследованиям Aptos Александра Шпигельмана о копировании открытого исходного кода Aptos.

optimistic concurrency control was discovered in 1979, before your parents met each other

software transactional memory (STM) I was working on in the Haskell context while you were still wearing diapers

BlockSTM is a trivial extension of these

I've never looked at any Aptos… https://t.co/cYtjO0F34y
— James (@_jhunsaker) February 19, 2025

19 февраля состоялся запуск публичного тестнета Monad. По заявлениям команды EVM-совместимой L1-платформы, за первые 12 часов сеть обработала 334 млн RPC-запросов. Пропускная способность достигла 5000 TPS.

В апреле 2024 года проект привлек $225 млн в раунде под руководством Paradigm.

«Я реально не понимаю, почему Monad так долго копирует технологию Aptos. Это все с открытым исходным кодом, для всего есть рецензируемые статьи», — написал Шпигельман.

Он с иронией посоветовал конкурентам «прекратить попытки скрывать» дублирование и привел в пример Movement:

«Они с гордостью копируют и преуспевают».

В комментариях Шпигельман уточнил, что речь идет о воспроизведении разработчиками Monad некоторых технологических решений, включая модифицированный механизм исполнения BlockSTM от Aptos.

Хансакер ответил, что лежащий в основе метода оптимистичный контроль параллелизма был открыт в 1979 году. Программную транзакционную память (STM) спецалист также использовал десятки лет назад в контексте языка программирования Haskell.

«BlockSTM — это их тривиальное расширение. Я никогда не смотрел код Aptos. На самом деле я никогда не думаю об Aptos, за исключением тех случаев, когда вы публикуете подобную чушь», — заявил сооснователь Monad.

Напомним, в 2023 году команда Polygon Zero обвинила разработчиков L2-сети ZKsync Era — Matter Labs — в краже кода проекта.

Why the UXLINK hacker’s 14,336 ETH transfers raise fresh questions for DeFi

Recent on-chain activity reveals the UXLINK exploiter is actively laundering stolen funds, complicating tracing efforts. The September 2025 hack, which exploited a 'delegateCall' vulnerability to steal roughly $4.5 million, involved converting illicit assets into DAI and Ethereum. Recently, the attacker swapped over 10 million DAI for approximately 6,000.8 ETH and has deposited a total of 14,336.6 ETH into the privacy mixer Tornado Cash in recent weeks, including over $8.1 million worth in a single move. Simultaneously, wallets connected to the defunct Mining Express Ponzi scheme have been converting long-held assets, swapping 5,004 ETH for 8.8 million DAI. Following a separate exploit of the Jaredfromsubway.eth MEV bot, about $5.1 million was also routed to Tornado Cash. These incidents underscore a critical vulnerability in DeFi: while enabling permissionless transfers, the ecosystem lacks effective mechanisms to halt or manage illicit funds once in motion, allowing them to be moved and concealed relatively easily. This highlights the need for strengthened cross-network coordination and real-time threat detection to better safeguard the space.

ambcrypto7m ago

Why the UXLINK hacker’s 14,336 ETH transfers raise fresh questions for DeFi

ambcrypto7m ago

Li Fei-Fei's Latest Long-Form Article: When Video Generation, Robotics, and NVIDIA All Call Themselves World Models, We Need a Taxonomy

In a new article, Dr. Fei-Fei Li addresses the widespread and often inconsistent use of the term "world model" in AI. She proposes a clear, functional taxonomy rooted in the classic Partially Observable Markov Decision Process (POMDP) loop (agent → action → state → observation → agent). According to this framework, current systems called "world models" are different projections of this loop, categorized by their primary output: 1. **Renderers**: Output observations (pixels). Their goal is visual fidelity for human consumption (e.g., video generation models like Sora). They are the most commercially mature but are limited by a focus on appearance over physical accuracy. 2. **Simulators**: Output states (geometric, physical, dynamic representations). They provide a structurally accurate world for both human professionals (e.g., architects) and computational agents (e.g., robots for training). Li argues simulators are the crucial, underappreciated bridge, as they can underpin both rendering and planning. 3. **Planners**: Output actions. Given an observation and a goal, they decide what an agent should do next (e.g., robotic action models). This area is highly promising but remains the least mature for real-world deployment. Li highlights a key trend: the boundaries between these three categories are beginning to blur, as they all rely on a shared underlying understanding of geometry, physics, and dynamics. The logical endpoint is a unified world foundation model capable of switching between rendering, simulation, and planning based on downstream needs. This convergence, she concludes, is central to advancing spatial intelligence—enabling machines not just to talk about the world, but to truly understand, imagine, and interact with it.

marsbit46m ago

Li Fei-Fei's Latest Long-Form Article: When Video Generation, Robotics, and NVIDIA All Call Themselves World Models, We Need a Taxonomy

marsbit46m ago

Forbes Feature: Stablecoin Cross-Border Payments Are Faster, But Not Yet Cheaper

A Forbes feature delves into the state of stablecoin-based cross-border payments, noting rapid growth but a key shortfall: while faster and more accessible, they are not yet cheaper. At a recent industry conference in Mexico City, optimism about technology, regulation, and volume was tempered by discussions with practitioners. The core issue is liquidity. Traditional FX brokers charge 60-70 basis points, and stablecoins promise to slash this to 2-5 basis points. However, this theoretical cost advantage cannot be realized until deep liquidity pools are established at scale, requiring significant institutional capital inflow. A major adoption barrier is trust. Businesses often rely on long-standing relationships with traditional brokers, valuing reliability over marginal cost savings. This shift will be gradual. Furthermore, successful companies in the space are not positioning themselves as replacements for legacy systems like SWIFT, but as complements. They leverage stablecoins for speed while using traditional rails for their standardization and reliability in ensuring accurate payment details—a critical factor for supplier payments to avoid customs issues. Companies like Caliza, experiencing high monthly growth, exemplify this hybrid approach. The industry anticipates consolidation, as long-term viability will depend on securing the essential trifecta: proper licensing, robust fiat on/off-ramps, and deep liquidity. Without these, firms risk being mere intermediaries rather than building sustainable businesses.

marsbit47m ago

Forbes Feature: Stablecoin Cross-Border Payments Are Faster, But Not Yet Cheaper

marsbit47m ago

Forbes Feature: Cross-Border Payments with Stablecoins are Faster, But Not Yet Cheaper

A Forbes feature on stablecoin cross-border payments highlights rapid industry growth but notes the cost advantage remains theoretical. While stablecoins offer faster, 24/7, and more accessible international transfers compared to traditional forex brokers (charging 60-70 bps), they have not yet achieved their promised lower costs of 2-5 bps. The primary hurdle is a lack of deep, scaled liquidity pools, according to Imran Ahmad of Bitso Business. He states costs will only drop significantly with large-scale institutional and banking participation. Adoption faces a deeper challenge: trust. Businesses often stick with traditional brokers based on long-standing personal relationships, not just fees. Ezra Kebrab of cross-border payment firm Caliza emphasizes that reliability in handling complex details like tax codes is as critical as speed and cost. Contrary to some narratives, successful companies like Caliza see stablecoins as complementing, not replacing, existing infrastructure like SWIFT, which excels at payment standardization. Caliza itself uses SWIFT for many transactions and has seen monthly growth exceeding 40%. Ahmad predicts a future industry consolidation, where success will hinge on three pillars: proper licensing, reliable fiat on/off-ramps, and robust liquidity.

链捕手51m ago

Forbes Feature: Cross-Border Payments with Stablecoins are Faster, But Not Yet Cheaper

链捕手51m ago

Li Feifei's Latest Article: When Video Generation, Robotics, and NVIDIA All Claim to Have 'World Models,' We Need a Taxonomy

"World Model" has become a widely used yet ambiguous term in AI. Drawing from the classic POMDP framework (agent → action → state → observation), this article proposes a functional taxonomy to clarify the concept. It identifies three distinct types, categorized by their output in the perception-action loop: 1. **Renderers**: Output visual observations (pixels). These models, like advanced video generators, prioritize visual fidelity but often lack underlying physical accuracy. 2. **Simulators**: Output the state of the world (geometry, physics, dynamics). They provide a structurally accurate representation for professionals (e.g., architects) and serve as training environments for robots and AI agents. 3. **Planners**: Output actions. Given an observation and a goal, they determine what an agent should do next, closing the perception-action loop (e.g., vision-language-action models). While renderers are currently the most commercially mature and planners are the most aspirational, the article argues that **simulators are the crucial, underappreciated hub**. By working at the level of geometry and physics, a simulator can project upwards to create visuals for humans and downwards to predict action consequences for agents. The future lies in the convergence of these three functions. Emerging research and products, like World Labs' Marble model which outputs both visual splats and physical collision meshes, are beginning to blur these boundaries. The logical endpoint is a unified world foundation model capable of rendering, simulating, and planning based on a shared understanding of spatial and temporal structures—ultimately enabling machines to understand, imagine, and interact with the physical world.

链捕手58m ago

Li Feifei's Latest Article: When Video Generation, Robotics, and NVIDIA All Claim to Have 'World Models,' We Need a Taxonomy