$APECHAIN
Heating UpSnapshot Window: 2026-07-24 14:00 UTC · ← Back to Crypto Overview
Social Momentum Summary
Total Engagement - Comments: 1, Retweets: 0, Likes: 1, Impressions: 16
Verbatim Community Citations & Social Evidence 1 source posts analyzed
Two things make Flock stand out: it targets Boolean circuits rather than arithmetic, and it's designed for batch proving, where the same circuit runs repeatedly. Both properties make it exceptional for hash functions. @ronrothblum , on what makes Flock different. [Spoken audio]: I would say two special things that made it unique in terms of what we're targeting. So first of all, snarks usually rely on some sort of math or arithmetic, and traditionally it's often been sort of based on large prime numbers and operating modules of these large primes. And because that's sort of the arithmetic that underlies the snark, that's sort of the computations that also involve this type of arithmetic are the ones that are easiest to target. So traditionally, a lot of SNARCs have been sort of like, they work very well for these kind of arithmetic computation larger than large primes. In contrast, what we were targeting with Flux is what's known as Boolean computations, which is just a fancy way of saying, you know, you can express this computation just by doing bitwise and an extort, which are things that natively computers anyhow do, and they're not kind of in any way unique to the SNARC setting. So one special thing is that we're specifically targeting Boolean computations, I'll say in a few seconds, why? The second thing that is kind of special is that we're, the other thing we're kind of focusing on is a scenario in which you don't have an arbitrary Boolean computation you're interested in, but rather there is some like underlying Boolean computation and you want to prove it many, many times. Okay, so you have like a particular type of Boolean circuit or Boolean algorithm that is being executed many times we want to prove that the execution was correct. So that's kind of what we're focusing. So it's the batch setting, so many executions of a Boolean circuit. The reason we focus on Boolean circuits are, I guess, first and foremost, because it is a very natural model and computations in general are typically very nice to represent this way. But specifically, especially in the context of this discussion, traditional hash functions that were designed decades ago are very, very easy to express in this way. So things like Shattie56, Ketchak, Blake, many of the traditional hash functions whose security has been sort of scrutinized for decades can all be very, very easily expressed in this way. And if you have a snack that is very good at proving Boolean computations, it should perform well on these type of hash functions.
