Two UX Original Sins Holding Ethereum Back

1. Hex addresses
2. Connect Wallet

no mass adoption till we we submerge both (they'll live on, just not user-facing)

why? (1/3)

ADDRESSES - NO VALIDATION. you can accidentally send $10k to the USDC contract address--burnt--and UIs won't warn you. conversely, no way to prevent arbitrary inbound.

every address is an everything bagel! so for now, every wallet must support any asset arriving on any chain.

explain this to your parents (h/t @phil):

Building /bright-moments - minting onchain art IRL | /purple #15 | FID 129 #magikarp

Florence, Metropolitan City of Florence, Italy

Real World Ethereum 🌎 
building /daimo ✳️ 

CONNECT WALLET - website proposes arbitrary transactions and signatures. user eyeballs and clicks "accept" or "reject". fundamentally impossible to make safe in general case, even with simulation. devtool UX in practice

HOW TO FIX?

Our best guess:
1. L2 ENS / FID. give everyone a name (*)
2. INBOX. handle "any asset, any chain" without complicating the UI
3. TRUSTED CONTRACTS. Daimo, for example, uses specific, well-understood contracts. nice UI, no "lose money" button = happy users (**)

(*) - I'd love to see a base58 address format that includes chainID. shorter, better.

(**) - we can still do a lot (swaps, fast cross chain sends, etc). can even add subaccounts for arbitrary actions with risk limited to the subaccount. more soon ⚡

i️f this sounds interesting to you, DM me. we're hiring. /end

Creating quicktick.io, a Chrome extension which provides realtime insights for cashtags on Twitter

yes. metamask popularized (and is still the default for) both of those

Hex addresses should be treated like IP addresses for accounts instead of machines.

We have firewalls, NATs, proxies, load balancers and a bunch of tech to manage requests sent to IP addresses.

We'll need the same for hex addresses as more data moves onchain.

Wallets as we know them today will go away.