CryptoPoltr

$TAMA the first token trading exclusively on TamaSwap. 100% of the supply was added to the liquidity pool with 1 ETH. Not officially affiliated with TamaSwap just a meme token I created as an experiment. CA: 0x989ab6b15297697c282f218ea671fd1df2d0e4c5

@z0r0zzz I look at it from the perspective that in order for Circle to block USDC in a Uniswap v4 pool, they would have to blacklist the PoolManager contract, which, for obvious reasons, they are not going to do.

@CryptoPoltr Circle blacklisting a pool is the same as blacklisting a singleton. They are saying an address cannot spend the ERC20. While singleton can carry more pools, liquidity converges onto narrow tiers. Fungibility of ERC20 LP is better than ranged LP for use case of privacy wrapper.

how to create unblacklistable USDC privacy wrapper on ethereum. step 1: put USDC and USDT into LP step 2: use LP to mint cUSD and cUSDT step 3: that is pretty much the whole deal

@z0r0zzz Then Circle can blacklist the pool address

@CryptoPoltr nah v2 prob works best

The TamaSwap interface is still pretty raw and doesn’t yet make it easy to buy tokens or create liquidity pools properly. So for now, you can buy $TAMA or create your own liquidity pool directly through the router: etherscan.io/address/0x0000…

$TAMA the first token trading exclusively on TamaSwap. 100% of the supply was added to the liquidity pool with 1 ETH. Not officially affiliated with TamaSwap just a meme token I created as an experiment. CA: 0x989ab6b15297697c282f218ea671fd1df2d0e4c5

@shenghanjun8 Thanks for pointing it out. Writing code at 6 AM was clearly not the best idea, lmao. I fixed everything. Here’s the new locker contract and the LP lock transaction: 0x48c81b03b8bedb00ef8bfea745a259aa3ab65b63 0xcd6c5e8db6a08fa01d114fed118d5d2feb05261920e4b8d09854e7225c493016

@CryptoPoltr require(block.number >= UNLOCK_BLOCK, "still locked"); The unlock condition should use the block number. You should redeploy the contract. Trust me.

1/2 For obvious reasons, existing services like UNCX don’t support TamaSwap liquidity locks, so I wrote a simple custom locker contract and locked the LP for 90 days.

It’s already 7 AM and I still haven’t gone to sleep, so I’m finally heading to bed. I believe that while I sleep, you guys will pump $TAMA to a million 🚀

@shenghanjun8 This is not a timestamp but a block number, so everything is correct etherscan.io/block/countdow…

@CryptoPoltr Your unlock time appears to be set incorrectly. uint256 public constant UNLOCK_TIME = 25846031;

@igniteBTW x.com/CryptoPoltr/st…

@CryptoPoltr could you burn the lp sir? narrative's actually great, first token on the provably unhackable dex

2/2 Locker contract: 0x2e202a3ab69c97beac2c2407a792f2fad60005f5 LP lock tx: 0x6cd31989694262c04658a9c8350ad99d1c27062f711bddd7655d0a16b3a26858

Introducing TamaSwap, the first provably unhackable DEX. - No-free-lunch theorem, machine-checked via Lean - Onchain HTML interface, forever online - No protocol fees, no-code deploy to any EVM chain Built with Tama + Verity. AGPL license. The platonic ideal of xy=k.

@gryazintweets it's over

Russian childhood in 2026 be like:

Tomorrow at 10am ET I will be presenting EIP-8182 in the All Core Devs - Execution biweekly call! Join if you love privacy!

Ethereum has a 12-second blocktime. By slicing the block into sub-blocks, Realtime Ethereum moves in milliseconds ⚡️ No more waiting. No more uncertainty. Just 100x faster. The era of Realtime Ethereum starts now. Go Realtime at : docs.ethgas.com/realtime/

@mqxoniwe @ProsperityDAO_ 🫡

@ProsperityDAO_ thanks @CryptoPoltr for unipeg

April was a movie 🎥

LODE is live on mainnet A Uniswap v4 hook that captures the LVR liquidity providers leak to arbitrageurs and burns LODE with the protocol's cut First swap fired today, 1 bp, treasury liquidity only lode.markets

PSE interviewed 38 teams working on privacy, and the takeaway is clear: Ethereum should standardize private transfers as shared L1 infrastructure. How? EIP-8182. It proposes adding native private transfers to the Ethereum L1 via a protocol-level shielded pool for ETH and ERC-20s. Here’s the support from @PrivacyEthereum’s report — (1) A standardized, shared private-transfer layer. PSE found "limited or no standards for private tokens, compliance, or wallet interactions," raised by 8 of 38 teams. They also found that "shielded pools are fragmented across different dapps and chains, reducing the effective anonymity set for all users," and that "each new privacy protocol must bootstrap its own anonymity set." The interviewee’s requested fixes? - "A protocol-level shielded pool... including requests for private ETH transfers and a multi-asset shielded pool." - "Shared primitives to avoid fragmentation." This is the entire point of EIP-8182: bringing the ecosystem together around a shared default for private transfers. Wallets, apps, exchanges, payroll providers, and treasuries finally get one thing to integrate against, instead of every team bootstrapping its own pool, anonymity set, wallet support, and tooling. — (2) Wallets, key management, hardware wallets. PSE reported "privacy features... are not natively integrated into major wallets. This forces reliance on specific dapps, and significantly damages UX." Ten of 38 teams raised this. They also note that "hardware wallets do not natively support ZK-friendly curves and signature schemes such as EdDSA over BabyJubJub," and that key management complexity is itself a UX hurdle. This is a first-class concern for EIP-8182: users must be able to make private transfers from their existing wallet, even if it cannot create a zk proof (e.g., is a hardware wallet). EIP-8182 achieves this by splitting spend authorization from the ability to prove. A wallet can authorize a spend via a signature and then the user can construct a proof around the signature on a more capable device. — (3) Cost. PSE's two most-mentioned technical problems were ZK proof generation time (14 of 38 teams) and ZK proof verification gas (13). They cite sub-second proving as the threshold where this stops being a UX problem. Current EIP-8182 reference numbers: - Pool circuit: 42,959 constraints, 19 public inputs - Native rapidsnark proving (M5 Max): 0.68s - snarkjs WASM proving: ~1s - Pool proof verification: ~316K gas — PSE’s research points to one conclusion: Ethereum should prioritize cheap, accessible, shared private-transfer infrastructure. EIP-8182 is a concrete path.