Arem

@polarisfinance_ Yet, big vision, big impact, big future.

Tight ship, tight crew, tight peg: Six people, full-time. Three devs. No marketing department. Engineers building, not marketers selling. Our comms team right now is a two founders, many Claudes army.

Stablecoin research still has a real blind spot. Most people can tell you whether a peg is holding. Far fewer can tell you what is actually holding it up, how fragile the exit really is, or where the risk sits once the surface starts to crack. That gap matters more now because stablecoins are no longer a niche corner of crypto. They are becoming part of its monetary infrastructure. And the way we analyze them needs to reflect that. And yet a lot of the market still studies them in a fairly improvised way: a general dashboard, a Dune query, a few issuer documents, some posts on X, then a rough intuition that one asset feels safer or cleaner than another. Fragments pieced together and passed off as analysis. That used to be enough. It is not anymore. Pharos started as a stablecoin dashboard. What it is becoming is something closer to an observatory; one built around a single idea: that reading stablecoins properly means reading their structure, not just their surface. In that sense, Pharos is less a dashboard than a structural analytical framework for making sense of stablecoin systems. The problem is no longer access to data. There is plenty of it. The problem is that it is scattered, poorly framed, and rarely assembled in a way that reflects how these systems actually work. Most tools help you inspect isolated signals. They do far less to help you read the structure underneath them. That is what Pharos is built to do. Not simply give you more information, plenty of tools can do that, but organize the problem differently. Instead of leaving you with disconnected indicators, Pharos shows how those indicators relate to one another: liquidity, redemption paths, concentration, dependency chains, censorship exposure, stress points. That changes the quality of the analysis. One of the hardest things about stablecoins is that visible stability often sits on top of hidden fragility. A stablecoin can look calm while leaning on another stablecoin, on centralized collateral, or on redemption assumptions that only get tested when the market turns. The surface can look fine right up until it doesn't. Pharos makes those dependencies easier to see. And once you see them, you stop thinking in terms of isolated coins and start thinking in terms of monetary structures layered on top of other monetary structures. That is also what makes it a new way of reading stablecoin risk: not as a simple question of price stability, but as a question of structure, dependency, liquidity, and control. That is a more serious way to assess risk than simply checking whether something is still trading close to one dollar. The same goes for liquidity. A peg tells you something, but not the thing that matters most when conditions get worse. The real question is whether you can actually exit: through which route, with what depth, at what size, and under what constraints. Stablecoins are not just price-stable assets. They are claims on a set of exit conditions, and those conditions vary far more than the market likes to admit. Power is another dimension that deserves to be central, not treated as a footnote. If a stablecoin can be frozen, blacklisted, or operationally constrained across multiple chains, that is part of its monetary profile. Pharos treats it that way because a structural reading of any stablecoin has to account for who ultimately controls it. Pharos is also built to help you see stress building before the break becomes obvious to everyone else: when liquidity quietly thins, concentration rises, redemption assumptions weaken, and dependency chains stop looking theoretical. That is the point where a dashboard becomes something more useful. Memory matters too. Broken pegs, failed mechanisms, and past stress events are not just history. They are part of the analytical frame. A market that forgets its failures tends to misread the next version of the same risk. This matters even more because stablecoins no longer form one simple category. They differ by reserve model, collateral type, governance structure, chain environment, reference unit, and use case. We are looking at a monetary field that is diversifying in real time. Pharos does not replace DeFiLlama, Dune, issuer documents, or the role X plays in surfacing information and debate. It fills a different need: helping people read stablecoins as monetary architectures rather than as a list of tickers. More precisely, it is emerging as an observability layer for a monetary field that is becoming broader, more heterogeneous, and harder to read through price alone. Price is easy. Structure is harder to read. That is what Pharos is built for. Article Written by @aremd_

@thedaofund What I find most compelling here is the design itself: neither pure crowd logic nor closed expert control, but a more thoughtful balance between the two. To me, that is where the real innovation lies. Very interested to see how this unfolds 👀

@thedaofund More than a 500 ETH round: this is institutional infrastructure for Ethereum security. Long-term capital, community coordination, expert-weighted allocation. Turning a founding crisis into future resilience. Huge credit to Giveth 🙌🏻

TheDAO Security Fund’s first round is out! We’re kicking things off with a broadly scoped Ethereum Security quadratic funding round on Giveth as the first move in our bottom-up distribution strategy. Why QF? Because we wanted the first round to do more than just allocate funds. QF is still one of the most powerful funding mechanisms Ethereum has produced. It gives the community a real voice, helps projects build awareness around their work, and creates extra upside for the Ethereum security space beyond the funding itself. That felt like the right energy for a first round. Not to mention, QF could also bring in meaningful donations on top of the pool. Extra funding for security is always good! Why keep the scope broad? There are so many projects out there building tools, standards, infrastructure, response systems, and protections that make Ethereum safer every single day, but this work is easy to miss if you’re not deep in it already. This round gives that work a chance to gain better adoption. We hope the many projects, tools, newsletters (and more) that join the round will become more widely known by everyone who participates, especially the ETHSecurity Badgeholders. This new awareness around what is already out there will, in itself, improve Ethereum security. Why Giveth? Because Giveth is already working closely on TheDAO Security Fund’s operations, including standing up the ETHSecurity Badges program, and going forward, they’ll also be working with all of our round operators. That made them the natural choice for running the first round. This first round is not just about getting funds out the door. It’s also about getting a real process in motion, learning from it, and making the next rounds better because of it. And on a practical level, Giveth is also the only Ethereum-focused team still actively running QF rounds at this scale. Read all about the round here 👇

Ethereum can be as amazing as it is now, and even more with the cool stuff coming IT DOEST MATTER EVEN FOR A SECOND IF ALL WE DO WITH IT IS EXCHANGE TOKENIZED TBILLS Time to stop sleeping on this, unless you like the idea of DeFi being the TraFi's shitcoin distribution layer

@Ikebillion_ @PharosWatch Thanks to you @Ikebillion_ . Without your help it would’nt be the same.

@aremd_ @PharosWatch Amazing blog post, @aremd_ ! 🫶

Most people analyze stablecoins backward. Real risk sits upstream: dependency, thin liquidity, censorship, broken redemptions. Price is obvious. Structure isn’t. That’s why @PharosWatch matters. Full article in first reply.

Ike is a well-known researcher who lives and breathes stablecoins. He has been using Pharos long before we came calling, and he understands what we are building at a level deeper than most. We are proud to announce he will be joining us as our Growth & Comms lead. Welcome to the team, @Ikebillion_. 🤝

@TokenBrice 🤩 and next round Gödel, Escher, Bach?

In multi-agent mode, Codex gives name to the agents: so cute! Go at it Hilbert, Kant and Carver, sounds like an ace bug-squashing team

A fair trade offer: 3000 BOLD, for monitoring the situation with proper tools You use @PharosWatch to conduct analysis and product content, you earn top#1: 1250, #2: 750, #3: 250 BOLD + If you find something off, or request an actionable feature, there are 250 BOLD x 3 to grab

The @polarisfinance_ testnet has been running for a week and i think its time to dive into how the different mechanics are working to show what Polaris is capable of *This is a testnet environment and actors are not acting rationally so we expect mainnet data to be different 🧵

@AbdelStark BUT: Freedom tech is not enough Code needs culture Sovereignty is relational To be continued

One path: AI becomes the ultimate instrument of centralized power. Surveillance scales beyond human capacity. Censorship becomes automatic. Systems flag dissent before it forms. A handful of corporations and states control the models, the data, the compute. They see everything. They predict everything. They control everything. The asymmetry of power becomes absolute. The other path: individuals embrace AI faster than institutions can weaponize it. Sovereign AI runs locally, privately, answering only to its owner. Open-source models spread beyond any entity’s control. AI agents become equalizers, giving every person capabilities that once required entire organizations. Pick your side. fgu.tech

Maker set rates by governance vote. Liquity v1 has no rates. Liquity v2 pushes rate-setting onto borrowers, many use managers Polaris reads minting and redemption volume as proxy signals for peg status. Fully autonomous. Fully onchain. polarisfinance.io/blog/polaris-m…

@TokenBrice Voilà ce que j’appelle documenter une pratique ! 😂

I call Codex a "MF" about 35 times a day, never happened once with Claude For some reasons when GPT is getting retarded, he responds pretty well to insults He also performs his best work when instructed: "Claude will verify your code afterwards, be careful" Go figure

Not sure where to start? There is a guide for that too: pharos.watch/start/

@TokenBrice At this speed, our only role is to watch the Strategic Crypto Monetary Observatory build itself—might as well grab some popcorn 🍿👏🏻

A delight for the eyes: triple cmcs execution: 3 Claudes managing their many Codexes I think I finally found the trick to Claude to the max without hitting the weekly limit

@TokenBrice Optimal strategy: no single supplier and the option to switch to open source as soon as possible? Is that really an option?

One kudos I'll give Codex is his testing-suite development skills, but I never asked Claude to do that for me so I'm not sure here. I was running Claude with no tests, because Claude never broke prod. Codex destroyed prod three times in the first day, so I had to ask him.

After using both Claude and Codex, I am confidently saying that if I was given unlimited Claude, I'd not use Codex. Now adjusting my workflow to have Claude tightly define task that require half a lazy brain, to offload to Codex to better manage Claude's weekly limit.

We've sat in governance seats. Led committees. Flagged conflicts of interest years before anyone cared. Rather than leaving the door open for abuses to occur, we'll seal that closed before shipping. That's why we're building stewardship: polarisfinance.io/blog/stewardsh…

Worried about depegs? DEWS is always watching with escalation alerts sent to the telegram channel @PharosWatch