aribma

Today's @KelpDAO exploiter deposited the stolen $rsETH into various lending protocols (AaveV3, CompoundV3, Euler) and and borrowed massive $WETHs w/ >$236m debt.

Kelp rsETH exploit is terrible due to extensive DeFi integrations. Not sure how big the exposure is yet but: - Aave V3: Markets already frozen - SparkLend: Also froze the rsETH market - Lido Earn via Mellow strategy meta-vault. I think it was a leveraged market - Fluid: Frozen market - Compound - Euler - Upshift: Paused High Growth ETH and Kelp Gain vaults - Pendle PT YT tokens - Some Beefy strategies. Yearn? I suppose LayerZero is probably affected too, as rsETH were bridged from L2s, so I wonder if those rsETH on L2s aren't worthless right now. The situation is still developing, so I don't want to FUD any protocol, but it seems there are not many places to hide in DeFi.

If you have WETH on Aave V3 Core, withdraw now, ask questions later.

Pump and dump activity for $RAVE originated on @bitget @binance @Gate Call to action for both @heyibinance @GracyBitget to do better and launch internal investigation offboarding the responsible actors. Offering up to $10K bounty of my personal funds for whistleblowers to come forward privately to share evidence about parties involved We cannot allow this blatant market manipulation by insiders controlling >90% RAVE support to further extract from retail investors.

ACI is leaving Aave. governance.aave.com/t/aci-is-leavi…

As the Aave DAO is about to vote on the largest funding proposal in its history involving a controversial contributor, Aave Labs, we published a full audit of their (lack of) performance. It's a very long read, but I invite everyone to dive in and form their own opinion based on evidence.

BGD will be leaving Aave governance.aave.com/t/bgd-leaving-…

Crypto as we know it is over. It's time to look at the abyss and stop acting like this industry will in any way recover if the leaders continue to act like everything is fine and the 50th perps DEX will solve this. The Death of the Crypto VC sector is slowly unfolding during the past few months. LP commitments have been on a low and didn't even remotely recover during a generational $16k -> $120k bull market. VCs like Mechanism/Tangent literally pivoted away from crypto. Half of the Paradigm team ragequit in the last 2 months, entire firms silently exited everything. Barely any crypto VC has been able to raise for another fund and the venture appetite is close to zero. Please for the love of god look at the data & stop coping that this in any way is normal or will recover for a sector claiming to be on the frontier of technology. The risk appetite inside venture has been off the charts in the last 3 years, blockchain received only outflows. I spoke to so many VCs (both tradfi and crypto) in the past month, and close to nobody was optimistic about them being able to raise for another crypto-fund. We are at the tail end of blockchain innovation. "Oh ownership coins fix this" No they don't. Sorry to burst your bubble, but as the founder of a company doing "ownership" structures, this fixes exactly nothing. It's a band-aid of complacency. I'd argue it actually makes it worse, because no talented young founder will chose to give anonymous tokenholders full control of their business, it just turns crypto even more into this autistic cypherpunk delusion. Blockchain & especially alt coins has moved from the frontier of technology to an un-investable asset class who's building products who nobody needs. And the VCs who are left are trying their best to unauthentically manufacture narratives, fund the current hot thing (just to be left at 0 after the 3y vesting starts, and the current hot thing turned out to be not so societally important as the fast moving crypto sector thought it would be). The frontier of technology has moved away from blockchain and sits at AI & Robotics right now and blockchain right now is seen as the weird industry you enter to build something meaningless for exit liquidity. If we want this industry to bloom again, we need to work to get rid of the 3 in web3 and come back to reality. We need to go towards the epicenter of the current innovation and not try to artificially replicate it inside crypto. It's either valuable tokens for web2 startups or this sector & especially the venture market goes to 0. @StreetFDN

Have been following reactions to what I said about L2s about 1.5 days ago. One important thing that I believe is: "make yet another EVM chain and add an optimistic bridge to Ethereum with a 1 week delay" is to infra what forking Compound is to governance - something we've done far too much for far too long, because we got comfortable, and which has sapped our imagination and put us in a dead end. If you make an EVM chain *without* an optimistic bridge to Ethereum (aka an alt L1), that's even worse. We don't friggin need more copypasta EVM chains, and we definitely don't need even more L1s. L1 is scaling and is going to bring lots of EVM blockspace - not infinite (AIs in particular will need both more blockspace and lower latency than even a greatly scaled L1 can offer), but lots. Build something that brings something new to the table. I gave a few examples: privacy, app-specific efficiency, ultra-low latency, but my list is surely very incomplete. A second important thing that I believe is: regarding "connection to Ethereum", vibes need to match substance. I personally am a fan of many of the things that can be called "app chains". For example I think there's a large chance that the optimal architecture for prediction markets is something like: the market gets issued and resolved on L1, user accounts are on L1, but trading happens on some based rollup or other L2-like system, where the execution reads the L1 to verify signatures and markets. I like architectures where deep connection to L1 is first-class, and not an afterthought ("we're pretty much a separate chain, but oh yeah, we have a bridge, and ok fine let's put 1-2 devs to get it to stage 1 so the l2beat people will put a green checkmark on it so vitalik likes us"). The other extreme of "app chain", eg. the version where you convince some government registry, or social media platform, or gaming thing, to start putting merkle roots of its database, with STARKs that prove every update was authorized and signed and executed according to a pre-committed algorithm, onchain, is also reasonable - this is what makes the most sense to me in terms of "institutional L2s". It's obviously not Ethereum, not credibly neutral and not trustless - the operator can always just choose to say "we're switching to a different version with different rules now". But it would enable verifiable algorithmic transparency, a property that many of us would love to see in government, social media algorithms or wherever else, and it may enable economic activity that would otherwise not be possible. I think if you're the first thing, it's valid and great to call yourself an Ethereum application - it can't survive without Ethereum even technologically, it maximizes interoperability and composability with other Ethereum applications. If you're the second thing, then you're not Ethereum, but you are (i) bringing humanity more algorithmic transparency and trust minimization, so you're pursuing a similar vision, and (ii) depending on details probably synergistic with Ethereum. So you should just say those things directly! Basically: 1. Do something that brings something actually new to the table. 2. Vibes should match substance - the degree of connection to Ethereum in your public image should reflect the degree of connection to Ethereum that your thing has in reality.

There have recently been some discussions on the ongoing role of L2s in the Ethereum ecosystem, especially in the face of two facts: * L2s' progress to stage 2 (and, secondarily, on interop) has been far slower and more difficult than originally expected * L1 itself is scaling, fees are very low, and gaslimits are projected to increase greatly in 2026 Both of these facts, for their own separate reasons, mean that the original vision of L2s and their role in Ethereum no longer makes sense, and we need a new path. First, let us recap the original vision. Ethereum needs to scale. The definition of "Ethereum scaling" is the existence of large quantities of block space that is backed by the full faith and credit of Ethereum - that is, block space where, if you do things (including with ETH) inside that block space, your activities are guaranteed to be valid, uncensored, unreverted, untouched, as long as Ethereum itself functions. If you create a 10000 TPS EVM where its connection to L1 is mediated by a multisig bridge, then you are not scaling Ethereum. This vision no longer makes sense. L1 does not need L2s to be "branded shards", because L1 is itself scaling. And L2s are not able or willing to satisfy the properties that a true "branded shard" would require. I've even seen at least one explicitly saying that they may never want to go beyond stage 1, not just for technical reasons around ZK-EVM safety, but also because their customers' regulatory needs require them to have ultimate control. This may be doing the right thing for your customers. But it should be obvious that if you are doing this, then you are not "scaling Ethereum" in the sense meant by the rollup-centric roadmap. But that's fine! it's fine because Ethereum itself is now scaling directly on L1, with large planned increases to its gas limit this year and the years ahead. We should stop thinking about L2s as literally being "branded shards" of Ethereum, with the social status and responsibilities that this entails. Instead, we can think of L2s as being a full spectrum, which includes both chains backed by the full faith and credit of Ethereum with various unique properties (eg. not just EVM), as well as a whole array of options at different levels of connection to Ethereum, that each person (or bot) is free to care about or not care about depending on their needs. What would I do today if I were an L2? * Identify a value add other than "scaling". Examples: (i) non-EVM specialized features/VMs around privacy, (ii) efficiency specialized around a particular application, (iii) truly extreme levels of scaling that even a greatly expanded L1 will not do, (iv) a totally different design for non-financial applications, eg. social, identity, AI, (v) ultra-low-latency and other sequencing properties, (vi) maybe built-in oracles or decentralized dispute resolution or other "non-computationally-verifiable" features * Be stage 1 at the minimum (otherwise you really are just a separate L1 with a bridge, and you should just call yourself that) if you're doing things with ETH or other ethereum-issued assets * Support maximum interoperability with Ethereum, though this will differ for each one (eg. what if you're not EVM, or even not financial?) From Ethereum's side, over the past few months I've become more convinced of the value of the native rollup precompile, particuarly once we have enshrined ZK-EVM proofs that we need anyway to scale L1. This is a precompile that verifies a ZK-EVM proof, and it's "part of Ethereum", so (i) it auto-upgrades along with Ethereum, and (ii) if the precompile has a bug, Ethereum will hard-fork to fix the bug. The native rollup precompile would make full, security-council-free, EVM verification accessible. We should spend much more time working out how to design it in such a way that if your L2 is "EVM plus other stuff", then the native rollup precompile would verify the EVM, and you only have to bring your own prover for the "other stuff" (eg. Stylus). This might involve a canonical way of exposing a lookup table between contract call inputs and outputs, and letting you provide your own values to the lookup table (that you would prove separately). This would make it easy to have safe, strong, trustless interoperability with Ethereum. It also enables synchronous composability (see: ethresear.ch/t/combining-pr… and ethresear.ch/t/synchronous-… ). And from there, it's each L2's choice exactly what they want to build. Don't just "extend L1", figure out something new to add. This of course means that some will add things that are trust-dependent, or backdoored, or otherwise insecure; this is unavoidable in a permissionless ecosystem where developers have freedom. Our job should make to make it clear to users what guarantees they have, and to build up the strongest Ethereum that we can.

A clone of Epstein’s Gmail, GDrive and Google Photos jmail.world

@izebel_eth @loopify @CryptiqOfficial past few months ive spent more money sponsoring scanlations than on everything else combined (including costs of living) llamao

Isnt a 50 year mortgage effectively just renting a place from a bank?

I misunderstood the @Ledger multisig announcement the other day. I understood they've decided to charge like a Swiss private bank, but I've only just realized the extent to which they're not actually private at all... I was also dismayed to see that this is still NOT a Ledger app which actually allows normal people securely sign txs, which was the entire issue in the first place. I refuse to call it "clearsigning". There's just "signing" and "yolo signing", and the ability to not yolo sign is not a premium feature - it's basically functionality without which your product is reckless and irresponsible But back to the privacy: obviously I opted out of analytics, so imagine my surprise at all the tracker calls which @brave helpfully blocked for me So what's Ledger trying to share here with the friendly data harvesting technologists at @datadoghq ? * My personal Safe addresses * My personal browser metadata * My personal device metadata (screen resolution) * My every move that I take on the app What is this for? Ledger's own privacy policy states that sharing this kind of data requires consent, yet this is happening anyway to a company (Datadog, Inc.) not even mentioned in the privacy policy! And yes, I fully expect this project will be dead on arrival because of insane pricing. But I'm more concerned that once again a major crypto player like Ledger (and EU based to boot!) doesn't care about basic privacy protection or following the most basic privacy regulations @Ledger please do better than this, a privacy policy is not just a formality if you are a security company!

When ppl claim this I always wonder how they think it happens, or have unrealistic expectations on how much $1bn actually is. I joined crypto with $200. If I held my initial bitcoin since then and never traded, I would have ~$300k. If, instead, from that moment I sold the top and bought the bottom of every crypto cycle on Bitcoin, and never paid any taxes, I would have ~$6m USD. If I put my entire net worth into the Ethereum ICO and never touched it, today I would have ~$150m pre-tax. While it was definitely possible to have made >$1bn with the opportunities in the market, these versions of reality would also require me to make no mistakes, and have no need to spend $ in real life, or take excessive risk via leverage. In reality, I grew up in a working class family. I didn’t have a trust fund and I had to pay off my student loan myself. I had a job at Tescos while at high school. After university, I needed to pay rent and fund cost of living and eventually buy a place to live. I worked at startups for relatively little $ salary, and while a couple have done okay, they still are illiquid and worth nothing until some exit. Perhaps if I erase a couple of dumb mistakes and drawdowns, or if I had a lil more grind, then my answer would be different today. But it is easy to say this with perfect hindsight vision. It’s easy to see where you could have optimised better, and decisions you made look dumb when the past makes things so obvious. The truth is I have always optimised for enjoying my life and not going to 0. I never felt like I had a safety net, so it was never possible for me to do anything in any other way. I would probably have less money if I had tried to add more risk or chased $ harder, because being all-in with your entire livelihood is a mental battle and I feel I only win that battle when the stakes are lower. In writing this, maybe I do understand why CT folks believe this, because modern CT sees crypto as a late-stage lottery ticket farm, where the optimal strategy is to 5x leverage up your portfolio in a hope of catching a good 20% move and then leaving. Or, literally going all-in on the next coin they heard Ansem is buying. So perhaps to them, looking back at the charts, of course that’s what successful folks did. In reality, I use leverage close to never (and typically to reduce risk rather than add risk — have used it to add risk maybe 3 times in the last 5 years, and maybe 15 times ever). I never go all-in on anything, have only ever done that on BTC and ETH before in the last decade. When I buy other things, I limit risk to tiny amounts, because I treat it as a 0 until proven otherwise (so, always <1% liquid portfolio). Liquid portfolio is also a smaller % of overall portfolio to future-proof against my own fuckups. Obviously I made a lot of money, I have been here 12 years! CT doesn’t want to hear about “getting rich in a decade” though. I am happy with where I am and have never really cared or optimised for maximising $ earnings, but instead having a nice life that lets me enjoy the game we play together.

Flaunch Groups are LIVE! Any token on @Base be imported to Flaunch, creating an onchain economy where users can share in the upside. Your token is just the beginning.

“How much money is enough money?” Not Lamborghini money. Not yacht money. Just “I don’t have to answer emails” money. The level where rent, food, emergencies, and peace are covered without asking anyone for permission. Call it $500K–$5M depending on how feral your lifestyle is. The real flex isn’t being rich. It’s waking up and doing nothing… because you can.

Buy mid September liquidation and sell in December