interesting! Now we have to kneel down to the existence of AI accelerationism (e/acc). In just a few days and at a cost of less than $6000, the development team @ yq_comc successfully completed the entire roadmap of Ethereum towards 2030 with the help of Claude Code, including 65 major upgrades that have not yet been fully finalized .. It is equivalent to verifying through experiments in advance that the roadmap of Ethereum is not a cake, and it will land very well. For example, 3-Slot Finals, PeerDAS, Post Quantum Cryptography (PQ), RISC-V CPUs for ZK proofs, and so on, would have to work tirelessly for several years if they were to follow the predetermined plan. In the current industry atmosphere of "technology uselessness", this is truly a daunting task. But through the ETH2030 experiment, this technology upgrade, which was originally intended for the future, surprisingly became perfectly compatible with the mainnet in a code repository and passed all state tests. How to achieve it specifically? 1) Based on Geth client as the underlying execution module; 2) Assemble various complex upgrade plugins into Ethereum's native code through several streamlined adapters in the future; What did the results verify? Most importantly, it has been verified that Ethereum's final roadmap is fully "composable", especially dozens of EIP proposals across consensus, data, and execution layers that have been validated to work perfectly after all upgrades. This indicates that Ethereum's commercial narrative of realizing ZK lightweight EVM, achieving tens of thousands of TPS, and combating quantum threats is completely feasible and can be achieved in the foreseeable future. At this point, some people may say, since the code can run smoothly, why doesn't the Ethereum Foundation accelerate the technological upgrade? Due to the transition from POW to POS, and then to upgrades such as Dencun and Pectra, Ethereum's upgrade philosophy has always been "in-flight refueling". AI only proves the logical consistency of the code, but when the combined code is launched on production level clients, it still faces uncontrollable limitations of the Dark Forest Law. AI only proves that the code can run smoothly, but the complexity that the combined code faces when it goes live on a production level client cannot be assumed or simulated, and requires a little bit of testing, validation, and penetration .... But what I am curious about is whether we can verify more 'if's' by following this AI simulation approach? For example, what would happen if Ethereum erased its Layer 2 strategy over the past three years? What would have happened if we had chosen the segmented route back then? What if we persist in POW?? Also, after the implementation of Ethereum and FireDancer in 2030, Solana and Monad will compete on the same platform. Who is the stronger in real data? Wait Of course, those projects that draw a lot of big cakes but may have completely inconsistent logic will also be stripped of their underwear and thoroughly verified by AI simulation? haha...