$beacn

New UI/UX for Ledger Book: Ledger Book allows you to create a custom animated NFT that allows anybody to send on-chain messages to your book NFT! They can be minted in a dapp browser with Vespr/Eternal tested. beacnpool.github.io/ledger-scrolls…

@GoogleAIStudio LAN-Games so you can play open source multiplayer games offline. github.com/BEACNpool/LAN-…

What are you vibe coding this weekend?

I created an application to allow those impacted by the SecondFi incident to vote using their drep credentials (assuming they were not one of the four compromised drep credentials). If you are an impacted drep give it a go: multi-proposal-voter.vercel.app

TL;DR (for all the people who think: fuck off Holger, i am not reading your "book" 😂😅): Blockfrost wants ₳9,832,979 from the treasury. Charles sells it with a slide full of logos: Binance, Coinbase, Kraken, Circle, Revolut. 90% of Cardano's free-tier API traffic. 100 million queries a day. The company behind it, Five Binaries OÜ in Tallinn, shows around €184,000 turnover in 2025, falling every quarter, zero employees, €73 in national taxes over five quarters, and roughly €2 million in assets. Its 2025 annual report was due 30 June and still is not filed. Meanwhile the CEO says Blockfrost dies without our money, and Input Output, which owns it and calls it critical infrastructure, will not fund it. Tier-one customers or a project that cannot survive? Both stories cannot be true. Vote NO.

🚨TRANSPARENCY ALERT🚨 This guy is a genius at shooting himself in the foot every time he opens his mouth. So let me get this straight: Input Output takes over Blockfrost, and now the treasury is supposed to pay ₳9,832,979 for it. At today's price that is about $1.63M. We pay in ADA, not dollars, so that is the floor. At $0.50 ADA it is nearly $5M. Then Charles goes on video and reads out a list of Blockfrost customers. P2P, Blockdaemon, Crypto.com, Exodus, Fireblocks, Brave, BitGo, Intersect, Coinly, NuFi, Trezor, AdaHandle, Circle, Revolut, Binance, Kraken, Coinbase, "amongst many others." WAIT, WHAT!? WTF?! Revolut. 70 million users. Binance. Coinbase. Circle. Kraken. And these people need ₳9.8M from us? Let that sink in, and think about it twice. 1) Either that customer list means real money, in which case why is the community paying for this at all? 2) Or the list does not mean real money, in which case it was put on a slide in a funding pitch to make us feel like we are buying something valuable. It cannot be both. Here is what I found when I actually looked. ON THE CUSTOMERS There is no public evidence that Revolut is a Blockfrost customer. Charles also never says whether any of these are current customers, past customers, or accounts that signed up once and never came back. He never says what a single one of them pays. Several on that list are simply wallets and tools that support ADA, and being technically integrated is not the same as being a paying customer. A list of logos with no timeframe and no numbers is not a business case, and the burden is not on us to disprove it. If Revolut and Binance are paying customers today, that is trivially easy to prove. Prove it. NOW THE PART THAT DOES NOT ADD UP By their own account, Blockfrost serves roughly 90% of all free-tier API traffic on Cardano. At the time of the Input Output deal it was described as handling over 100 million data queries per day. That is enormous volume. Now put that next to a customer list containing Binance, Coinbase, Kraken, Circle and Revolut. Any normal infrastructure company with that traffic and those logos is printing money. This is exactly the business model that works. High volume, sticky integrations, enterprise clients who cannot easily switch. Companies get built on far less. So where is it? ON THE MONEY The company behind Blockfrost is Five Binaries OÜ, registry code 14908341, registered in Tallinn. From the public register: 100% owned by Marek Mahut personally. Input Output does not appear as a shareholder at all. Zero employees. Zero labour taxes. Declared sales: Q2 2025 €64,950 Q3 2025 €37,639 Q4 2025 €35,830 Q1 2026 €28,216 Q2 2026 €27,574 Down every single quarter. Estimated turnover 2025 about €184,000. Forecast for 2026 about €112,000. National taxes paid across those five quarters: €73. Seventy three euros. Balance sheet total: around €2 million in assets. Read that again. Around €2 million in assets, against maybe €112,000 of expected turnover this year and nobody on payroll. 100 million queries a day. Binance, Coinbase, Circle, Kraken on the slide. €184,000 a year. Those numbers describe two completely different companies. ON THE ACCOUNTS The 2025 annual report was due on 30 June 2026. It has not been filed. They had six months. This is a company with no employees, essentially one product and a handful of invoices. The report is a balance sheet, a profit and loss statement and a short activity note. In Estonia you do it online and sign it digitally. It is maybe a day of work. Six months. Not done. So we are told Binance and Revolut are customers, but the paperwork that every Estonian micro-company manages did not get done in half a year. And we are supposed to approve ₳9.8M without ever seeing those accounts. ON THE PROPOSAL ITSELF This is the second attempt. The first version, "Blockfrost: Maintenance and Next Generation Indexing," was voted down in May. It asked the treasury to subsidise running the free tier. Rejected, and not narrowly. Now it is back, wrapped as a gift. Blockfrost becomes a "free, community-governed public good," source code and trademarks transferred to a not-for-profit, a community-elected board, and Input Output "steps back from ownership and commercial control." Note that last part. Input Output owns it and controls it commercially. That is their own wording. So Input Output owns infrastructure they call critical, will not fund it themselves, and wants the treasury to pay ₳9.8M to take it off their hands. Meanwhile Marek Mahut says publicly that Blockfrost will not continue without this mandate. So which is it? A thriving business with tier-one customers and 100 million daily queries, or a project that dies without our money? Those are two different stories and both are being told in the same week. WHY I AM VOTING NO 1) The money is approved now, but the not-for-profit that receives it is only established in Q3 2026, its board is only elected in Q4 2026, and the transfer of Blockfrost itself only completes in Q1 2027. We pay first, the oversight arrives later, the asset arrives last. That is the wrong order. 2) Input Output says it will step back from "ownership and commercial control." Yet Input Output does not appear in Five Binaries OÜ's shareholder register at all. Marek Mahut holds 100%. So who owns what, and what exactly is being transferred to us for ₳9.8M? 3) No accounts have been published. No revenue, no costs, no disclosure of what a single named customer actually paid. We are asked to value an asset with zero financial information. 4) The company is sitting on around €2 million in assets. Nobody has explained why an entity holding €2M needs millions more from the community treasury, or what happens to that €2M when the "transfer to the community" takes place. 5) The 2025 annual report is not filed. Six months was not enough. That is the standard of administration we are being asked to fund. 6) Input Output owns this asset and calls it critical infrastructure, yet will not fund it out of its own pocket. If the owner will not pay for it, the treasury has no business being the buyer of last resort. 7) The story contradicts itself. Tier-one customers and 90% of ecosystem API traffic on one slide, cannot survive without a treasury handout on the next. Both cannot be true, and nobody has been asked to reconcile them. 8) The ask is denominated in ADA, so if ADA appreciates, the cost to the treasury appreciates with it. A one-time transition should be capped in fiat with the surplus returned. The proposal already promises to return unspent funds. The same logic applies here and it is not there. "Look at all these huge customers" is a slide, not a business case. Vote NO.❌ Your thoughts in the replies, please.👇 Take care!🫡

@SyncAI_Network CLI wallets the bots can sign transactions. I trained mine to mint NFTs but would like for it to be able to spend the ADA on the Internet at vendors. Imagine the bot buying more tokens with it's own ADA allowance.

If we want Cardano sitting at the table of AI innovation, here's what we need to focus on: → Agent SDKs and APIs → Natural language abstractions → Developer tooling → MCP servers → High-quality indexed data → Identity and permissions → Agent payment rails → Wallet standards for AI → Enterprise AI integration → Privacy-preserving AI These have become major focus areas for other ecosystems, backed by grants, hackathons, documentation, ecosystem partnerships, venture intros, etc. The time for us to act is now.

Blockfrost is great but let's not forget @CardanoKoios

@PaddyCTO @CardanoKoios 🐐

started as a way to play some games with the fam and decided to upload to git and share if anybody's interested. nothing fancy - setting the bar for @flubdubster so he's not disappointed lol github.com/BEACNpool/LAN-…

@SlimFlexington told claude to upload a repo incase anybody is interested - ive tested with a few games and already had to fix a few things but I think its all working right now github.com/BEACNpool/LAN-…

@BEACNpool oh thats pretty neat - i might have to start trying my hand at some multiplayer games eventually. Really been doing mostly educational single players for the most part.

@SlimFlexington had an extra server so I had fable create me LAN Games, so each person on your home network can go to the website and play against others in the games.

@SlimFlexington also congrats on the new edition!

@SlimFlexington being able to create multiplayer games without security since its LAN only is pretty cool, we can all be in different parts of the house but still playing games together

@BeatriceAnihiri @blockfrost_io noooo dont rub the eyes!! took it like a champ

i seriously thought i could keep a straight face the entire time 🌶️ : 2 🐝 : 0

@claudeai got any more of those extensions, buddy

We're extending Claude Fable 5 access on all paid plans, as well as keeping Claude Code’s weekly rate limits 50% higher, through July 19.

@KpunToN00b pool.pm/asset1yclcklm9…

watch out for pools that claim low fees but rake in a large portion of rewards via well-above-average fixed cost param - and the ones that have a website that says "Trust must be earned. staking pool has a margin fee of only x%!" where the actual fee structure doesn't match what website says...

@ItsDave_ADA @Jinx_The_Guy I trust you a lot more than your delegates so please dont ever change your vote for them <3, and thank you for all your efforts!

@Jinx_The_Guy lots of pressure

I just voted YES with 71.38 million ADA on the treasury withdrawal: Strike Finance V2 Treasury Deployment Proposal On behalf of all of my delegates. Rationale I am formally registering a YES vote on the Strike Finance V2 Treasury Deployment proposal. Each budget cycle demands a pragmatic balance between core infrastructure and ecosystem investment. I support this proposal because it offers productive returns when our viable yield-generation options are strictly limited. The perpetuals market is thriving globally, and anchoring this volume on Cardano is a strategic necessity. The Strike team has executed well—I have used the platform frequently in the past, though I hold no Strike tokens. Crucially, I strongly encourage the team to collaborate with L2 teams (like Hydra and Midgard) to ensure our scaling infrastructure is driven by genuine, high-volume market feedback rather than purely technical theories. Structurally, securing funds via an independent 3-of-3 multisig is a strong defense against collusion. However, future deployments of this magnitude must expand these committees to further decentralize control and eliminate single points of failure. While I ultimately advocate for a generic, ecosystem-wide stablecoin liquidity mechanism rather than protocol-specific applications, this proposal's strict drawdown limits and 12-month timeline make it a responsible, risk-managed deployment today. Thank you to the Strike team for building on Cardano. To all other projects, there is opportunity here, and we are watching and listening. Transaction adastat.net/transactions/0…

3 out of 3 just minted for GNP1 in Epoch 643 2 more leader slots in Epoch 644 Given our zero fee structure why are you not supporting small pools and delegating to GNP1

The debate around Blockfrost should focus on the broader governance issue, specifically the coordination and approval of the strategy. Blockfrost is asking the Cardano Treasury for ₳9.8M to transition its infrastructure into a community-governed public good. However, Blockfrost is not Cardano’s only infrastructure provider. Koios, Maestro, Iagon Insight, Demeter, and other projects provide competing or complementary services. Many smaller teams also maintain developer tools and public infrastructure, but there is currently no open and predictable mechanism through which they can request comparable support. Initiatives such as CB DAO and other DAO-based funding mechanisms have not received sufficient support. Cardano lacks a coordinated process for distributing smaller grants, comparing competing providers, and prioritizing ecosystem needs. On-chain governance fails in this because it is expected (and even required by many DReps) that all teams request funding through the on-chain process. The average ask in on-chain governance is ₳28M. Do small requests really have to compete with the big ones? Isn't it better if experts, not all DReps, decide on smaller requests? Large and well-organized teams can submit standalone Treasury withdrawals, while smaller projects have no clear path to funding. Maybe small teams don't have ₳100K to deposit. This makes the Blockfrost decision difficult for responsible DReps. Approving almost ₳10 million for one provider may be defensible in isolation, but Treasury decisions cannot be evaluated only in isolation. DReps must also consider market fairness and the needs of projects that have no access to funding. Funding a free Blockfrost service could also place unfunded competitors at a disadvantage. Our goal should be to make these services profitable or minimize costs. Treasury can't afford to pay high infrastructure costs every year. We’re back to the same topic again. Cardano governance has a serious coordination problem. We have no agreed-upon infrastructure strategy, funding categories, or mechanism for balancing one large request against numerous smaller ecosystem needs. Before approving major withdrawals, DReps need to prepare and approve the wider plan, which will include not only the dominant players but also the relevant small ones. Responsible governance requires more than deciding whether one proposal is valuable. It requires a coordinated and fair plan for the ecosystem as a whole. I personally use Blockfrost, Koios, and other tools in several projects, and I collaborate with teams that use them. I am aware of the importance of these tools.

@CSWAP_Destroy LMAO whats in those boxes

Lol. Brilliant strategy.

@NaVi_GaT0R Honestly, I'm with you on this one. I'm getting tired of this. Can we meet with someone to learn about Iagon insights? We've been paying blockfrost faithfully for years. I'm not happy to hear about this.