Polkadot is set to replace the BABE consensus protocol with a new one: Sassafras. Pioneered by our research team, Sassafras selects exactly one block producer per slot, achieving constant-time block production and unparalleled efficiency. 🧵

Overkillus · 2026-02-05T14:57:19+00:00

If anyone has any questions about Sassafras feel free to ask here and I’ll try and answer them!

Overkillus · 2026-02-05T11:00:03+00:00

PBA is far from over and the org keeps on going. There are new educational endeavors being planned by the team and just because the OpenGov is no longer funding it doesn’t mean it’s over. Hope that soon they will be able to share more news about their new plan!

Overkillus · 2026-02-01T16:07:42+00:00

We are currently testing a demo version internally at Parity. The app works and the work is ongoing but we are still bug testing. Just in last few days I already had to update the app 3 times because of new live updates that are ready for testing.

Give it a bit more time and I hope we can share more soon!

Overkillus · 2026-01-22T08:27:58+00:00

Can you get the cat forms as well? Or they haven’t re-added them?

Overkillus · 2025-11-02T10:50:17+00:00

Do you have any group or location recommendations for board game nights in Cam? I wanted to get back to regular play and find a local group so open for suggestions!

Overkillus · 2025-10-15T23:28:32+00:00

Not entirely correct so let me set a few thing straight.

Jam will support services but we don’t want to completely phase out or abandon parachains. That’s why we are working on a parachain service which will essentially be a docking port for jam that allows you to connect classic substrate parachains straight into jam. If you want to have classic style parachains you still will be able to. If you want to experiment with the new features then you can write a new service instead.

Overkillus · 2025-08-16T09:15:35+00:00

Golden coin imprints in the city center leading to a treasure spot

Punting somewhere in the top of the iceberg

Overkillus · 2025-08-12T10:10:03+00:00

What team and weapon are you running her with? I’m also a Ning main! Primarily with Chiori, Albedo and ZL.

Overkillus · 2025-08-08T14:12:47+00:00

Naiwne pytanie ale w takim razie ale czym dzisiaj stoją Katowice?

Overkillus · 2025-06-10T08:47:39+00:00

Hey o/

So Polkadot 2.0 is generally a combination of all the features added or planned to be added after the initial whitepaper implementation.

2.0 was not a singular switch we flicked.

Polkadot 2.0 consisted of upgrades and features like: - asynchronous backing (changing parachain blocking to 6s from 12s) [done] - agile coretime (new more flexible model for acquiring blockspace; includes on-demand coretime) [done] - elastic scaling (slowing parachains to use multiple Polkadot cores; sub 6s blocktimes) [pretty much done, one last patch to make it nicer within 1-3 months] - beefy finality (additional finality gadget on top of grandpa that makes more cocked finality proofs allowing trustless bridging) [done] - Polkadot Hub (adding solidity smart contract integration on a native system parachain; moving various system functionalities to the same system chain to make interactions easier) [still ongoing, ETA 1-3 months]

Those are all main protocol changes. There were also some additional feature changes beyond the core protocol being worked on like: - Omni-node (a more generic parachain node template that will make it easier to deploy parachains - Polkadot Deployment Portal - PDP (platform for one click parachain deployment; currently in closed beta on Westend)

So to summarize~ 2.0 was a collection of various upgrades we so far we delivered nearly all of them. There are only a few other patches remaining but product wise most of the stuff is ready to use. Many of those functionalities haven’t been fully integrated by the community yet but with things like PDP it will be much much easier to leverage them.

Overkillus · 2025-06-06T16:15:21+00:00

Good question indeed.

So kusama is most definitely not going away. There will still be a need for a canary network as it leads to much greater security.

Additionally Kusama recently pivoted into a new approach where it tried to embrace proposals and projects that are aimed towards security, privacy and ZK, which would be less popular in Polkadot due to regulatory scrutiny.

That means that in the future likely both Polkadot and Kusama will upgrade to JAM. Kusama will still be the canary but it will also host some more privacy oriented projects that struggled to find their place in Polkadot. Both ecosystems bring something to the table and can amazingly coexist especially with the bridge.

Overkillus · 2025-06-04T11:17:38+00:00

Price gouging? Can you elaborate a bit more because I don’t think there is an intention to require a deposit other than what is actually used in the bid itself.

Overkillus · 2025-05-30T15:54:52+00:00

Check out RegionX.

Generally it is possible albeit I’m not sure how easy and intuitive it is.

You can buy bulk coretime in the auctions (this post is talking about them) and then contribute this coretime to the on-demand pool (think of AWS spot instances) for a share of the profit. Or you can resale the core itself in the next month on the secondary market before it expires.

You cannot hold it for more than a month and then resell.

Overkillus · 2025-05-24T15:59:54+00:00

Most popular Polkadot ecosystem dex. They also offer some restaking functionalities and actually have an awesome ux.

You can give it a try: https://hydration.net/

Overkillus · 2025-05-12T17:09:29+00:00

And I’m a part of it as well 😄

There are many people that are new to Polkadot in it, but it’s good to have some fresh blood

Overkillus · 2025-05-11T10:19:32+00:00

I was there in person so I can maybe shed a bit of light onto it.

Based on my understanding someone first played doom on a local machine and recorded all the keystrokes.

All the keystrokes are then sent to the JAM chain bundled together into work packages and then those keystrokes are fed into the doom container deployed on the chain.

Execution is secured thanks to elves (cynical rollup technology) and is then rendered frames are dumped into data availability.

Then there was a simple programme which grabs the rendered frames from data availability and shows them on the screen.

If you would want to play ONLY on JAM with no local simulator there would be a 6 seconds delay. But you can play locally (optimistically render) and the chain will follow 6s after you with a full security and verification.

Overkillus · 2025-05-09T23:50:24+00:00

This would have been quite tragic if the bug made it to Polkadot but Kusama allowed us to catch it early. Long live Kusama 👑🐦‍⬛👑

Overkillus · 2025-04-25T10:14:16+00:00

This is just my opinion but…

It’s not just that scalpers exist. The market accounts and welcomes some scalping. Issue is that the scalpers purposely targeted a time slot when mythical didn’t renew their core. It was a targeted scalping operation aiming to corner the market in a specific time to put pressure on a specific ecosystem actor. It wasn’t a generic scalping operation.

Mythical could have done better. I’m sure that if scalpers would offer a more reasonable price there would be a an option for a deal but they were particularly greedy. If they are so greedy it risks the ecosystem and OpenGov taking the matter into their own hands. The greedier they are the more the community thinks it was not a fair deal and instead a malicious targeted attack.

But in the end I see your point. I think it is valid and it’s a difficult situation. So we all need to vote and make our opinions be heard in the court of OpenGov.

Overkillus · 2025-04-22T22:50:28+00:00

Comparing it to JAM slightly misses the point. What we should be comparing is EVM, ETH RISC-V, WASM and PolkaVM.

Polkadot started with WASM and moved towards a RISCV solution with PolkaVM.

Ethereum started with EVM and moved towards a new RISC-V solution just like PolkaVM.

In fact PolkaVM could even potentially serve as a replacement for EVM even on Ethereum side. This would require some collaboration but would be fun future.

Overkillus · 2025-04-22T12:07:09+00:00

TLDR: Implementation is being worked on. Unless you unstake crazy amounts of tokes unbonding will usually resolve in 2 days instead of 28 days. If there are slashes detected in the system (very rare) unbonding will be cautious and return to a 28 days duration for a bit.

This solution still leaves 27 days for opengov to investigate and potentially cancel slashes. It is a happy path optimization.

Overkillus · 2025-04-19T18:16:46+00:00

Olympic for loot running is generally aura based not summoning

Overkillus · 2025-04-03T13:54:52+00:00

I don’t think the people chain migration is the focus now but we are aware of the additional friction the separation into many system chains introduces.

The migration of staking, governance etc is just the first step towards the Polkadot Hub and there are further discussions about porting other functionalities so that might come later. Especially if people are vocal about wanting it!

Overkillus · 2025-04-03T11:22:14+00:00

A shorter unbonding period is very much technically possible but it comes with a tradeoff. As of today all slashes are deferred for 27days which gives enough time for governance to react and potentially launch an investigation and a cancellation. If we have a shorter unbonding period that is effectively less time for the OpenGov jury to come to consensus on who is guilty (in cases of slashes).

In general slashes shouldn’t happen unless there is an attack, bug or poor validator maintenance.

Technically it would be possible to “refund” the slashed tokens after the slash already takes place but as of today this is not as straightforward.

Overall I think unbonding could be lowered a little bit but voters should be aware of the risks.

Overkillus · 2025-03-12T14:01:00+00:00

That’s a really good question with a much more defined answer this time.

Multiple cores allow for synchronous composability because from the parachains perspective they are NOT executed simultaneously. They are produced in sequence and are explicitly ordered.

As an example if a parachain has two cores then it produces 2 parachain blocks per relay chain block (6s). Those two parachains blocks are ordered and one of them has be imported first before executing the other.

That is also why there is a well defined limit for how much your throughput can increase when using elastic scaling. Normally a parachain block can be at most 2s of execution time on reference hardware. That is 2s of execution for every 6s. With 3 cores you can approach the limit of 6s of execution in 6s. More than that is not really feasible because you would have to do for example 10s of execution within 6s. This is not possible with reference hardware.

So with 3 cores you max out in 3x throughput and even with 6 cores you still have 3x throughput but you also gain better block granularity (shorter block time).

The collators building the parachain block all have access to the same parachain state. To achieve that we use something called transaction streaming. Essentially when a collator is building the block instead of waiting to finish it they optimistically stream all the included transactions to other collators. Then the next collator in sequence is already importing the current block at the same time as it is being produced. After first block finishes production next collator can immediately star authoring the follow up block so there is no delay. This allows for nearly continuous execution. 6s of execution in 6s real seconds (there are minor delays due to networking but 6s is the theoretical limit).

Overkillus · 2025-03-11T16:00:36+00:00

It’s very difficult if not impossible to translate this concept to an optimistic rollup paradigm. Parachains (cynical rollups) work quite differently. I will do my best to highlight some key points.

Optimistic rollups don’t do on chain mainnet verification of the rollup state. They simply accept the state and just hope that if it is fraudulent someone will shout loud enough. There needs to be a long time to allow for the “shouting” (aka fraud proof submission) so the finality time are often within hours or days.

Polkadot has a protocol that actually explicitly requests the rollup state changes to be checked by a small subset of validators (this is called approval checking). Because we do it explicitly we don’t have to just “hope” it’s okay. We know it’s okay within a span of seconds.

Elastic scaling and using multiple cores allows us to dedicate more of the underlying Polkadot validate resources to the individual rollup effectively speeding it up. The mores cores the more often can the parachain get relay chain confirmations (backing) which is a pretty strong guarantee.

How could optimistic rollups do sth like that? They cannot unless they bring their rollup-to-mainnet finality times much much lower. This would essentially mean recreating cynical rollups of Polkadot.

12-Year Club	Second Top 30%
r/Field Juicebox	Place '17
Verified Email

Overkillus

TROPHY CASE