Evgeniy May

An Ode to the BitMEX Legends youtu.be/fjz1yIl9Bhg?si… через @YouTube

A massive $HYPE buy! Wallet 0xb5E4, linked to #a16z, bought another 372,000 $HYPE($16.91M) over the past 3 hours. Since April 14, this wallet has bought a total of 2.11M $HYPE ($90.87M). intel.arkm.com/explorer/addre… x.com/lookonchain/st…

Skills in Grok Web can be used by typing /

@KryptoDed @solana

@solana Made TON x Rolex

Un ingeniero de IA de Jane Street reveló cómo entrenaron su propio LLM para trading y generar 22,5 mil millones de dólares al año. 16 minutos. Gratis. Directo de quants de primer nivel. Guárdalo y míralo: probablemente sea la charla más honesta jamás publicada sobre “IA dentro de un hedge fund”. Olvídate de los gurús de YouTube vendiendo “bots de trading con IA”. Esta es la visión real desde dentro: datos, entrenamiento, evaluaciones e integración. (Guárdalo antes de que sea tarde)

"Memory is cyclical, everyone knows that, and the recent run up in memory names is an obvious bubble." That's the easy, reflexive view. But I think the people who hold it are missing the simple scale of what AI is doing to memory demand. The first clue that there might be more to the memory story came in January of this year when it came out that NVDA's next gen Rubin platform would require 16 TB of NAND per GPU, or 1152 TB per rack, and that required HBM bandwidth for the system would be 70% higher than what had been previously reported. That was the first time it became obvious to outside observers that memory would need to scale exponentially to keep up with already-known GPU demand. One under-appreciated fact is that while GPU compute has largely scaled with Moore's Law (doubling in compute ~every 2 years), memory density and speed hasn't. As GPU compute continues to scale, existing memory manufacturers must produce exponentially more chips. These chips will also need to be faster than ever, which introduces an incredible technical challenge: how can memory manufacturers find the required speed improvements that have eluded them for decades? When you combine this added technical complexity with an exponentially expanding demand for the product, memory starts to look less like the "commodity" everyone knows it to be, and much more like a high-margin proprietary chip. This hasn't even touched on memory's role in inference (compute needed for inference is expanding exponentially as well, and is highly memory-dependent), long context, etc. Agentic AI requires agents to pull massive amounts of data into their context, which increases the number of tokens per "turn" and also the amount of memory required to run them. True agentic systems will require both dramatically higher context, and also many more "turns" or iterations of each task (as they improve an output over and over until it reaches a target quality level). Longer context = more memory per workload, and more "turns" = more workload per output. To put a specific number on that, Micron SVP Jeremy Werner said recently on The Circuit that agentic AI is causing context length to grow 30x a year. Michael Dell recently framed the problem in extremely simple terms: H100 had 80GB of HBM; by 2028, accelerators could carry ~2TB. That is 25x more memory per accelerator. Over the same period, he expects roughly 25x more accelerators deployed. That's 25 x 25 = 625x more accelerator memory demand by 2028. Everyone knows memory stocks are cyclical, and they always look cheap right before the bubble bursts. But what if there are structural changes happening in the memory markets that could prove the consensus wrong? Does anyone remember another traditionally cyclical company that has rerated to a growth story due to the demand from AI? Hint: It's now the most valuable company in the world. Reminder: this is not a recommendation to buy or sell any securities. It's a framework for thinking about how the AI buildout may be changing the memory market.

@TexasTSLA Very good 😊

Wait we can just plug in a Mac Mini to our Teslas?? 👀👀😱😱

Scam Altman didn’t tell the OpenAI board that he OWNED the OpenAI Startup Fund. Altman lied in congressional testimony that he didn’t have financial gain from OpenAI.

@karin_veri So beautiful 🤗

#NewProfilePic embracing the age my soul belongs in

THIS SHOULD BE ILLEGAL. A rental car company with $25 billion in debt just exploded 600% in a month because two investors own over 100% of the stock. Avis Budget Group $CAR hit a record high of $608.80 on Monday, surging 23% in a single day. Two hedge funds, SRS Investment and Pentwater Capital, control 71% of the shares but when including their cash-settled equity swaps, their combined holding exceeds the entire outstanding supply. This is a company that reported a $995 million net loss last year and has been struggling under a massive debt load for months. One technical ownership glitch changed everything. The supply mismatch is so extreme that short sellers are trapped in a mathematical impossibility. With zero shares left to borrow and the float effectively non existent, the market just gave a debt heavy rental company a 6x gain simply because the math broke.

Claude explains the $71M @arbitrum clawback: What this transaction is Tx: 0x5618...0f6b on Arbitrum, block 454686044, April 21, 2026 03:35 UTC From: 0x5d39...7Ccc — labeled on Arbiscan as “Kelp DAO Exploiter 1” To: 0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000DA0 — a special system/recovery sink (not the normal 0x...dEaD burn address) Value: 30,765.667 ETH (~$71M) — effectively the entire Arbitrum-side balance of the attacker’s hub wallet Tx type: ArbitrumUnsignedTxType (EIP-2718 type 0x65 / 101) The “type 101” is the key. That is not a user-signed transaction — a normal EOA physically cannot produce one. ArbitrumUnsignedTxType is an ArbOS system transaction that only the chain itself (via the sequencer / ArbOS upgrade path controlled by the Arbitrum Security Council) can inject. It bypasses the attacker’s private key entirely. The remediation (this tx): Arbitrum’s Security Council used its emergency powers to inject an ArbitrumUnsignedTxType that forcibly moved the attacker’s full 30,765 ETH from the hub address into a protocol-controlled recovery sink (0x...0DA0). Why it’s “extraordinary” Arbitrum did not perform a reorg or historical rewrite — the chain’s ordering is intact. Instead, the Security Council used a privileged state-override transaction type that is part of ArbOS but has essentially never been used before. It is functionally a state-level clawback: the attacker’s private key still signs txs, but that address’s ETH was moved by the chain itself. This is the mechanism Arbitrum’s progressive-decentralization docs reserve for “catastrophic” emergencies (12-of-N Security Council action), and this is one of the clearest public demonstrations of it being invoked. Note that it only recovered the Arbitrum leg of the theft — the ~75,700 ETH on Ethereum is outside Arbitrum’s control and remains with the attacker, which is why Aave is still facing up to ~$230M of potential bad debt on the Ethereum side. Sources: Arbiscan tx: arbiscan.io/tx/0x561804424… Arbitrum Docs — ArbOS / Sequencer forced inclusion: docs.arbitrum.io/run-arbitrum-n… Arbitrum Foundation — progressive decentralization & Security Council: docs.arbitrum.foundation/state-of-progr…

Combined Map is live on Borsa! Bids + short-liqs − asks − long-liqs, summed in USD per bucket and rendered as one signed heatmap. The right-edge curve shows cumulative net pressure from mid outward. The bars show the walls. The curve shows how they're stacked. Try it out: app.borsa.cc

#BTC whale orderbook update Strong resistance： Heavy sell wall at 72.2K–72.3K (~$70M) Solid demand. Bid support stacked at 70.4K–70.8K (~$135M) Breakdown (approx): 70,688: $3.9M 70,679: $14.1M 70,666: $10.6M 70,611: $14.6M 70,588: $14.6M 70,555: $14.7M 70,533: $14.2M 70,522: $14.2M 70,500: $32.3M This is a $130M+ bid cluster, a very strong liquidity base ,not just normal support, but a real accumulation zone.

CLAUDE BUILT A BOT THAT TRADES LIKE A MARKET MAKER AND PAYS ITSELF FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE BOOK. While most traders try to guess the winner, this one just sits in the middle, captures the spread, and keeps climbing.

@karin_veri @BinanceAngels oh, well done ❤️

push-ups are not my strong suit ahah go participate in the challenge by @BinanceAngels – stay fit 💪

Just tried it. Push ups. Not proper form or speed, but the best I could do for now. I am 49. I challenge you to do better. 😉 (Unedited, no AI, straight from camera)

The most insane long game hack of all time! North Korea built an entire trading firm Conference passes In-person meetings Multiple countries Half a year of Telegram messages and working sessions Even $1M of their own capital deposited to look legitimate Then when all the pieces were in place they stole $280M Drift just released the full incident background and it’s wild! Fall 2025: A "quant trading firm" approaches contributors of Drift at a major conference. They Follow up in person across multiple countries. Technically fluent. Verifiable backgrounds. Typical trust building stuff. December-March: They onboard a real Ecosystem Vault and attend working sessions They even deposit $1M to further build ‘trust’ The long con had set in and by early 2026, these weren't strangers anymore They had now built a 6-month working relationship Then they share some repos which is routine stuff The attack vector: a VSCode/Cursor vulnerability flagged by the security community throughout late 2025. Opening a file was enough. Silent code execution. No prompt. No warning. Nothing. The moment the exploit fired, every Telegram message and trace of malware was scrubbed clean No record or trace left Every team managing meaningful TVL is a target and no one is safe from professional jobs such as this Six months of infiltration and a trusted relationship, not just a sketchy email link The bug is patched but the real attack vector was the relationship and patience How do you protect against that? 🤯