galgo

@0xTommyGenesis @bitcoinwell @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 Unlike you, I read the proposal, and am answering based on what it says. If you are too stupid to read it, and expect people to answer your every question, you could at least not be an asshole. Cause its one thing to be stupid but if you are also an asshole, that's a bit too much

@galgocrypto @bitcoinwell @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 Pre 2013 wallets don't have seed phrases so you're 100% full of shit

This is gonna be pretty funny Poor people will correctly vote “no” to freezing wallets And rich people will be forced to offload all of their bitcoin in response, nuking the entire industry in a firesale There is no way to avoid this

@maybeltr An they probably bought heavy equity in Drift at cheap prices, one of the biggest perp dexs in Solana, if not the biggest.

Tether really gave up 150m just to shit on Circle Absolute PR masterclass

@0xNIC0 Hey Nico, how does Drift recovery plan with Tether affects Reflect protocol and users? Are we getting our funds back?

A lot of questions have come in about USDC+ and single-venue allocation. Given everything that's happened, it's worth walking through the reasoning directly. What follows is personal, not an official statement from Reflect. Every architectural decision at Reflect starts from one principle: the protocol does not take custodial control over user assets. Full stop. That principle is what led to single-venue allocation for USDC+ beta, and the reasoning is important to understand. Distributing collateral across multiple venues means rebalancing between them. The question is: who does the rebalancing and on what basis? If the team moves collateral between venues at its own discretion, that action starts to look like custody. It doesn't matter what the smart contracts say if the team is the one deciding where funds sit. This isn't a theoretical distinction. The SEC recently clarified that DeFi interfaces operating in a non-custodial, non-discretionary manner may operate without broker-dealer registration, while those that exercise discretionary control over user assets fall inside the regulatory perimeter. Where a protocol sits on that line matters, and it informed how Reflect was built from day one. I was not willing to cross that line. The standard was that rebalancing must happen permissionlessly, on-chain, driven by allocation weights determined through independent risk analysis rather than the team's own judgment. That required the smart contract infrastructure to support multi-venue routing, and an independent risk framework to inform the allocation decisions. This is not the easy path. But I believe it's the right one, and that the space will ultimately move in this direction. Both remain a core focus for the team. Drift was the lending venue that USDC+ launched on. Moving collateral away from it to another venue after launch would have been the same kind of discretionary team action over user assets that the entire architecture was designed to prevent. None of this changes the outcome for the people affected, and I understand that. Building with conviction doesn't guarantee the outcome. I'm not sharing this to explain away what happened. I'm sharing it because the people who used Reflect beta deserve to understand the architecture and the thinking behind it. Building the right way is slower. It's harder. But I didn't start Reflect to take shortcuts. More to come. Official updates through @reflectmoney.

@FabianoSolana makes you think if tether wasn't behind the sophisticated and expensive hack

After all tether played 4d chess (with Circle) - Circle didn't freeze stolen funds - tether steps in and gives $127.5M credit - Likely they get equity as collateral too With $6B annualized revenue they've likely just acquired the biggest perps dex on Solana with pocket money

@bilecikli_soll @cryppimagic That's my thought too. It's obvious Tether's actions are not selfless, I guess they saw an opportunity and took it.

@cryppimagic Tether a new owner on DRIFT. I think

i’m not an expert of course, but how is drift going to repay these $150m? when Bybit got hacked and covered $1.4b, it made sense to me that they could recover that relatively quickly from revenue but drift? they only made about $4m in revenue over the past year. if things continue like this and they allocate all revenue to repayments, it would take around 37 years so how?

@AndreyLazorenko @DriftProtocol @tether In times of crisis, smart money sees opportunity. Tether must have made a great deal out of this. Anyways, still happy to get my funds back.

@DriftProtocol @tether The most important thing is that affected users will be made whole. Neat play by Tether, though.

Today, Drift is announcing a collaboration with @tether and other partners totaling up to nearly $150 million to support our commitment to a relaunch with USDT at the center, and a path to user recovery. These funds encompass a $100M revenue-linked credit facility, an ecosystem grant, and loans to market makers, designed to fund a dedicated user recovery pool. Learn more 👇

@2010OGNolambo @bitcoinwell @Jpeepeemorgan @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 A Quantum computer will be able to reverse engineer private keys through public keys.

@galgocrypto @bitcoinwell @Jpeepeemorgan @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 I might be uninformed, but how would the qc hack the wallet?

@2010OGNolambo @bitcoinwell @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 If they are not frozen, they will be eventually be stolen by hackers. Satoshi can move his BTC either way, even before the wallets being frozen, or after it with the ZK proof mechanism.

They can update without freezing. Also I would say saylor is bigger threat than qc Just upgrade, leave wallets alone, we now have a qc canary. Satoshi wallets are intrinsic to bitcoin. Imagine if they weren’t frozen. The bitcoin moves. The problem is solved, the legend grows, captivates the good people of earth, and bitcoin price action thrives. No more qc threat, no more satoshi wallets overhang, sounds bullish to me. If the devs freeze the wallets, you’re basically killing the talisman or fetish that attracts the devotees. Sounds dumb to me.

@0xTommyGenesis @bitcoinwell @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 Quantum attackers won't have the seed phrase. They will be able to reverse engineer private keys through public keys, but won't have seed phrases. The ZK process will be done using seed phrases.

@galgocrypto @bitcoinwell @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 "If they turn out to not be dormant, they will be able to recover the address." How? KYC? You mentioned "zk proofs" but that's not some magic word. Either you have the keys to the address or you don't. Quantum attackers would have the keys. Prove they aren't the original owner.

@bitcoinwell @Jpeepeemorgan @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 No one, that is why a proposal will be made and holders will vote on it. That is how this work, no one decides anything, its a vote.

@galgocrypto @Jpeepeemorgan @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 Who are you to decide no one should get them?

@MifflinApostles @bitcoinwell @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 Nothing can ever be 100% decentralized, but BTC is in fact the most decentralized currency or asset in the world, however you wanna call it.

@galgocrypto @bitcoinwell @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 Almost like the decentralized selling point was a scam…oh wait

@0xrahulweb3 Extended, 01Exchange, and maybe RIseX. Hotstuff might get there, but is still too early to tell.

Which perp DEX do you guys think has the potential to retain even 30% of their users after tge and generate strong revenue like Hyperliquid

@bitcoinwell @Jpeepeemorgan @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 You are clearly not understanding. If they are dormant, they will be hacked by Quantum hackers. Instead of that, there is an option to freeze them and no ones get them, unless someone recovers their keys or wants to reactivate their address, through a ZK process.

@Jpeepeemorgan @galgocrypto @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 Then no one owns them anyway.

@MifflinApostles @bitcoinwell @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 Well then there is impossible to reach decentralization according to you.

@galgocrypto @bitcoinwell @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 Just like voting in democratic elections are “decentralized” top holders will control the outcome

@MifflinApostles @bitcoinwell @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 Its a proposal that needs to pass and be accepted. Its literally the concept of decentralization.

@bitcoinwell @galgocrypto @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 So much for “decentralization”

@bitcoinwell @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 Why? People might have lost their keys and find it 20 years from now, and if the wallet wasn't frozen it would most likely be already hacked by Quantum hackers.

@galgocrypto @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 If they turn out to not be dormant they will move before they are stolen.

@bitcoinwell @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 There are dormant addresses to which people have no access, and will eventually be vulnerable to hacks through quantum computers. What happens to that BTC? If they turn out to not be dormant, they will be able to recover the address.

@galgocrypto @wontonsoupHL @gainzy222 Then sounds like those people have enough incentive to upgrade their addresses without your intervention.

@memes_airdrops @rodrigomcrypto There will be, not sure when, but eventually.

@galgocrypto @rodrigomcrypto I don't think $zro will have a season 2

Which of these 4 bridges do you use the most in your daily routine?

@memes_airdrops @rodrigomcrypto $ZRO also has future airdrops, and is by far the biggest and best of them all.

@rodrigomcrypto Jumper and relay because they are still tokenless

@rodrigomcrypto Stargate and Relay.