" or "Tallene ZisK publiserte". We'll use "Tallene ZisK publiserte".
Then: "ZisK's announcement claims a 9.62-second p99 across its test set, with 99.7% of tested Ethereum blocks finishing in under 10 seconds. The project also says the result carries 128-bit security and post-quantum resistance. The hardware: four RTX 5090s, which have a combined GPU-only power draw of 2.3 kW and cost $7,996 at launch. That's well under Ethereum's $100,000 equipment cap, but the benchmark doesn't say what the whole system pulled from the wall."
Norwegian: "ZisKs kunngjøring hevder en 9,62-sekunders p99 på tvers av testsuiten, med 99,7 % av testede Ethereum-blokker som fullførte på under 10 sekunder. Prosjektet sier også at resultatet har 128-biters sikkerhet og postkvantemotstand. Maskinvaren: fire RTX 5090-er, som har et samlet GPU-only strømforbruk på 2,3 kW og kostet 7 996 dollar ved lansering. Det er godt under Ethereums utstyrsgrense på 100 000 dollar, men benchmarken sier ikke hva hele systemet trakk fra veggen."
Note: "post-quantum resistance" -> "postkvantemotstand" or "postkvantum-sikkerhet". Use "postkvantemotstand". "power draw" -> "strømforbruk". "GPU-only" -> "GPU-only" or "kun GPU"? We can say "kun GPU-strømforbruk" but keep as "GPU-only" might be understood. I'll write "GPU-only strømforbruk". "launch" -> "lansering". "$7,996" -> "7 996 dollar" (Norwegian uses space as thousand separator). "$100,000" -> "100 000 dollar". "equipment cap" -> "utstyrsgrense". "pulled from the wall" -> "trakk fra veggen" (i.e., power from the wall).
Next: "What Ethereum actually demands" -> "Hva Ethereum faktisk krever" or "Hva Ethereum egentlig krever". Use "faktisk".
Then: "Ethereum's working standard isn't just a latency number. The Ethereum Foundation paired the 10-second target with five other conditions: on-premises equipment costing no more than $100,000, power draw under 10 kW, fully open-source code, at least 128-bit security, and proofs no larger than 300 KiB without trusted setups. ZisK checks the open-source box — it's MIT or Apache 2.0 licensed — and claims 128-bit security. But there's no word on proof size, and the power figure is only the GPU rating, not the whole system."
Norwegian: "Ethereums arbeidsstandard er ikke bare et latensnummer. Ethereum Foundation satte 10-sekunders målet sammen med fem andre betingelser: utstyr på stedet som koster maks 100 000 dollar, strømforbruk under 10 kW, fullt åpen kildekode, minst 128-biters sikkerhet, og bevis som ikke er større enn 300 KiB uten trusted setups. ZisK oppfyller åpen kildekode-kriteriet — det er lisensiert under MIT eller Apache 2.0 — og hevder 128-biters sikkerhet. Men det er ingen informasjon om bevisstørrelse, og strømforbruket er bare GPU-rating, ikke hele systemet."
We need to translate "trusted setups" - "trusted setup" is often "tillitsbasert oppsett" or "trusted setup" as is. I'll use "trusted setups" as it's technical. "on-premises" -> "on-premises" or "lokal". Better "lokal utstyr" but keep "on-premises" as is. "open-source code" -> "åpen kildekode". "proof size" -> "bevisstørrelse". "power figure" -> "strømforbrukstall".
Next: "The missing methodology" -> "Den manglende metodikken"
Then: "The benchmark lacks several critical details: the block range tested, the sample size, how the p99 was calculated, the timing boundary, the proof size, and measured whole-system power. That makes the result provisional. The Ethproofs API, which defines how proving time is measured, includes witness generation but excludes data fetching and proof-submission latency. Without knowing which boundary ZisK used, the 9.62-second figure isn't directly comparable to Ethereum's requirement."
Norwegian: "Benchmarken mangler flere kritiske detaljer: blokkområdet som ble testet, utvalgsstørrelsen, hvordan p99 ble beregnet, tidsgrensen, bevisstørrelsen og målt systemets totale strømforbruk. Dette gjør resultatet foreløpig. Ethproofs-API
