smol tide

I am now Smol tide Smol trump is retired Onward ❤️

@orangie @PixieChess

best video game to play while vibecoding / waiting for a runner?

Pixie chess

@schizohustler @PixieChess Camel is over rated imo Ironically all three of those pawns r better

@PixieChess holy fuck grab the camel while you still can boys

New @PixieChess pieces are up for Daily Auction!

@StanCifka @PixieChess Was a good tourney GG

If you would like to see War Automator in action, check this out! @PixieChess #pixiedaily

im absolutly addicted to this game.... and i havent been addicted to any game in a long time

Btc 79kish Eth 2400ish New range highs/obvious shorts next time Range low still to be seen Welcome to the bear market

How y’all feeling? Lolol

@based16z its not supposed to be a gatchya i am aware of many of ur fantastic calls.... more so giving myself a (imrightcookie)

This is gonna age like shit for at least the next 6 months (after this baby bounce) I’m confused why y’all r confused Guess cause btc fundamentals r really good lately But sorry to tell ya price ain’t rn and thats ALL THAT MATTERS

@NewsInSmol @ThinkingUSD ❤️

@smoltide @ThinkingUSD Tide is a chad

@ThinkingUSD u should hire me on some of these calls alone lol plz reach out and ask for my real name n dm(that matches with my resume already sent it)

Although I do agree It’s much harder to get excited about farming anything CBB is farming 😭

Man I used to believe this was true too until I created real edge Then I believed lots of others must have real edge as well Now I’m grateful that it turns out very few ppl do

@Easipaycarpets @realDonaldTrump lmaoooo

If @realDonaldTrump takes over Greenland I am going to protest I will take to the streets, he should take over our joke of a country it won’t be fair ,anyone no how we can put 🇬🇧 up for sale 🙈🙏 save us not Greenland maybe do both makeukgreatagain

@x256xx even that much is incredibly overkill maybe 1 percent or less

Imagine how the FYP would look if there were a public pool for clipping with a $100k daily budget. 2-4$ per 1k views. 25-50mil daily views would bring peak degeneracy to the platform and create many more perpdex gamblers.

Unpopular opinion: If Hyperliquid allocated even 5% of its revenue to short-form content clipping on TikTok, Reels, and YouTube Shorts—instead of putting everything into HYPE buybacks—user growth would already be 2-3x higher.

@Diegoworldwidee Lolololol

@altoshi0x Yes sir Once again…. ppl are slowly waking up

thoughts on zero fees perp dexs - commoditize the field for traders’ good I don’t think a zero-fee model is a bad idea. Hyperliquid generated ≈$1B in fees this year, paid by traders and mms. those fees were distributed to the Assistance Fund, meaning value was effectively transferred from users to token holders. In a zero-fee setup, that transfer doesn’t happen: traders keep more of what they make, and the venue itself captures less (or nothing). the tradeoff is that the business model stops being inherently profitable from fees, and the system becomes closer to zero-sum (ignoring other frictions like funding, slippage) a simple analogy is a casino. Each game has a “return to player” (RTP), often around 99%. That 1% gap is the house edge. even if outcomes feel close to 50/50 in any single round, over time that edge accumulates and players lose on average. with a true 0-fee perp DEX (and setting aside slippage), there’s no built-in house edge from trading fees. So the baseline becomes closer to 50/50: in the long run, a trader with no informational edge and a symmetric strategy should expect roughly flat results, rather than a slow bleed to fees. recent comparisons show that some 0-fee perp DEXs that are running incentives have better execution than Hyperliquid. and the main driver often isn’t “0 fees” by itself. It’s incentives. incentives effectively turn trading from a zero-sum game into a positive-sum game: the more you trade, the more you earn (points). That extra payout can outweigh spread/slippage for many users. why incentives can improve execution retail flow increases because it is incentivized, traders are being subsidized via points. Therefore, more (and healthier) flow attracts MMs, who also want points. in that environment, MMs may optimize less for spread PnL and more for incentive yield. as a result, MMs can quote much tighter spreads, potentially even “negative” effective spreads relative to what they’d normally require (i.e., tighter than the maker fee an exchange charges), because: - tighter quotes → more fills - more fills → more volume - more volume → more points/rewards so incentives can directly buy tighter markets and lower slippage. what happens when incentives end once incentives stop, the positive-sum subsidy disappears. The market tends to revert to zero-sum, or even negative-sum if market makers are charged fees. to remain profitable, MMs generally have to widen spreads to cover their full cost stack: 1) Maker fee (e.g., 0.002% on Lighter) 2) Operational costs (infra, latency, engineering, capital) 3) Inventory/price risk (adverse selection, volatility) 4) MM profit margin anyway, I still think this is better than charging fees. MMs face the same underlying cost structure everywhere: infra, inventory risk, and operational costs. The main variable the venue controls is fees/rebates on Hyperliquid, maker fees are close to zero for large-volume accounts, and can even turn negative via rebates. That can encourage tighter quoting and reduce spreads. on Lighter, the “cost” is effectively expressed through the **spread** (since makers still need to cover their costs), but the venue isn’t also extracting an explicit trading fee from users. If Lighter and Hyperliquid had equal retail flow, my base case is that Lighter would show better execution for retail because there’s no additional taker fee layer on top of spreads, even though if Lighter would have wider spreads. put differently: Hyperliquid making ≈$1B/year in fees is effectively a much larger “house edge” paid by users. Lighter (without points) keeps that money to traders, instead of themselves / token holders. this small read is not a $lit bullpost, moreover it is in opposite way, as it shows that the fees would stay with traders, not the house. While on Hyperliquid, fees come from traders to the house (holders) If you ask me on which exchange would I trade, I’d choose Lighter. If you ask which token would I hold, I’d choose $HYPE.