Strut

@TheBoggartt You want to start worrying when the agent is swearing at you to do things 😂

what having agents is actually like

@DegenToDisciple Either that or your spider-sense in tingling! Although I suspect it’s the love eggs tbh

@strut_eth always

I have this Also have some weird rumbling especially if something vibrates like a ps5 controller, no clue what that’s about

@official_taches What’s the CA?

Not going to use but as an experiment I created a script that automatically launches Solana tokens and in the same block as creating the liquidity pool, snipes a huge chunk of the supply, then automatically simulates real trading volume to trick people into thinking it’s organic then slowly while dumping batches at defined X percentages then ultimately extracts all liquidity to fully rug the project. Then it takes all profits earned in Sol and sends them back to a single centralized CEX wallet. It’s far, far too easy. No wonder 99% of Sol tokens are rug pulls. Stop stupid-gambling on shit coins launched by and invest in real projects.

@DegenToDisciple Any military action is that is worded “I will….” Is probably more ego related than strategic importance for a resolution”

And that will do what exactly

@Sportsbabe59 @luca_varan Only need to out-swim your friend! 😂

@luca_varan How they gone out-swim an otter🤣🤣🤣

Cette vidéo est légendaire 🤣🤣

@StarvnChartist Alpha incoming!

@cb_doge @grok is this similar to turning the moon into the Death Star?

ELON MUSK: SpaceX will build a mass driver on the moon. "If you want to go beyond a mere terawatt per year, you have to go to the moon. So by having factories on the moon, building AI satellites and having a mass driver, which is the kind of thing you really need to learn about in read about in science fiction, but we're going to make it real. We're actually going to have a mass driver on the moon. And if you do that, you can go several orders of magnitude greater. You can go to 1000 gigawatts or more per year, and ultimately get to maybe a millionth, and then a 1,000th and maybe even a few percent of the sun's energy. I really want to see the mass driver on the moon that is shooting AI satellites into deep space just go like just one after the other. I can't imagine anything more epic than a mass driver on the moon and a self sustaining city on the moon, and then going beyond the moon to Mars, going throughout our solar system, and ultimately, being out there among the stars and visiting all these star systems, maybe we'll meet aliens. Maybe we'll meet see some civilizations that lasted for millions of years, and we'll find the remnants of ancient alien civilizations. But the only way we're going to do that, do that, do that is if we go out there and we explore, and this is the path to making it happen."

@TheBoggartt Glad it’s not just me finding it buggy at times, I’ve spent more time trying to fix shit than it working. But I’ve seen the light when it was operating well. Mine isn’t for trading. Need to be prepared to go through the pain of setup and troubleshooting for a while first 👍

A very important document. Let's walk through this one "goal" at a time. We'll start with fast slots and fast finality. I expect that we'll reduce slot time in an incremental fashion, eg. I like the "sqrt(2) at a time" formula (12 -> 8 -> 6 -> 4 -> 3 -> 2, though the last two steps are more speculative and depend on heavy research). It is possible to go faster or slower here; but the high level is that we'll view the slot time as a parameter that we adjust down when we're confident it's safe to, similar to the blob target. Fast slots are off in their own lane at the top of the roadmap, and do not really seem to connect to anything. This is because the rest of the roadmap is pretty independent of the slot time: we would need to do roughly the same things whether the slot time is 2 seconds or 32 seconds There are a few intersection areas though. One is p2p improvements. @raulvk has recently been working on an optimized p2p layer for Ethereum, which uses erasure coding to greatly improve on the bandwidth/latency tradeoff frontier. Roughly speaking: in today's design, each node receives a full block body from several peers, and is able to accept and rebroadcast it as soon as it receives the first one. If the "width" (number of peers sending you the block) is low, then one bad peer can greatly delay when you receive the block. If width is high, there is a lot of unneeded data overhead. With erasure coding, you can choose a k-of-n setup, eg: split each block into 8 pieces so that with any 4 of them you can reconstruct the full block. This gives you much of the redundancy benefits of high width, without the overhead. We have stats that show that this architecture can greatly reduce 95th percentile block propagation time, making shorter slots viable with no security tradeoffs (except increased protocol complexity, though here the performance-gain-to-lines-of-code ratio is quite favorable) Another intersection area is the more complex slot structure that comes with ePBS, FOCIL, and the fast confirmation rule. These have important benefits, but they decrease the safe latency maximum from slot/3 to slot/5. There's ongoing research to try to pipeline things better to minimize losses (also note: the slot time is lower-bounded not just by slot latency, but also by the fixed-cost part of ZK prover latency), but there are some tradeoffs here. One way we are exploring to compensate for this is to change to an architecture where only ~256-1024 randomly selected attesters sign on each slot. For a fork choice (non-finalizing) function, this is totally sufficient. The smaller number of signatures lets us remove the aggregation phase, shortening the slots. Fast finality is more complex (the ultimate protocol is IMO simpler than status quo Gasper, but the change path is complex). Today, finality takes 16 minutes (12s slots * 32 slot epochs * 2.5 epochs) on average. The goal is to decouple slots and finality, so allow us to reason about both separately, and we are aiming to use a one-round-finality BFT algorithm (a Minimmit variant) to finalize. So endgame finality time might be eg. 6-16 sec. Because this is a very invasive set of changes, the plan is to bundle the largest step in each change with a switch of the cryptography, notably to post-quantum hash-based signatures, and to a maximally STARK-friendly hash (there are three possible responses to the recent Poseidon2 attacks: (i) increase round count or introduce other countermeasures such as a Monolith layer, (ii) go back to Poseidon1, which is even more lindy than Poseidon2 and has not seen flaws, (iii) use BLAKE3 or other maximally-cheap "conventional" hash. All are being researched). Additionally, there is a plan to introduce many of these changes piece-by-piece, eg. "1-epoch finality" means we adjust the current consensus to change from FFG-style finalization to Minimmit-style finalization. One possible finality time trajectory is: 16 min (today) -> 10m40s (8s slots) -> 6m24s (one-epoch finality) -> 1m12s (8-slot epochs, 6s slots) -> 48s (4s slots) -> 16s (minimmit) -> 8s (minimmit with more aggressive parameters) One interesting consequence of the incremental approach is that there is a pathway to making the slots quantum-resistant much sooner than making the finality quantum-resistant, so we may well quite quickly get to a regime where, if quantum computers suddenly appear, we lose the finality guarantee, but the chain keeps chugging along. Summary: expect to see progressive decreases of both slot time and finality time, and expect to see these changes to be intertwined with a "ship of Theseus" style component-by-component replacement of Ethereum's slot structure and consensus with a cleaner, simpler, quantum-resistant, prover-friendly, end-to-end formally-verified alternative.

👀 so that's the best Kimchi CA?

@jordymaui Great, thanks for this, I encountered similar. One thing no-one mentions is I used an old MacBook Pro, on Monterey OS, this had its own issues with installing homebrew, so I had ChatGPT open walking me through setup telling it my spec and giving me terminal commands to paste

@DegenToDisciple That’s just Marouine Fellaini returning to the team

I think $HAIRCUT should do well, I expect manchester united will finally win 5 games in a row and this guy shaves his hair reaching peak virality. He's not cut his hair for nearly 1 and a half years since they last won 5 in a row.

@LexaproTrader That’s what Ai would say

@strut_eth No 100% human made I spent an hour writing them myself I swear bro loll

100 new inventive Ai project names- you’re welcome in advance: ClawChain ClawSwap ClawBase ClawHub ClawNet ClawLabs ClawWorks ClawTech ClawFund ClawCapital ClawVentures ClawSystems ClawCloud ClawStack ClawFlow ClawLink ClawBridge ClawForge ClawVault ClawNode ClawGrid ClawAI ClawCore ClawEngine ClawProtocol ClawExchange ClawMarket ClawTrade ClawDex ClawPay ClawFinance ClawYield ClawBank ClawTrust ClawReserve ClawLedger ClawMint ClawLaunch ClawPad ClawStarter ClawFactory ClawWorks Studio ClawStudio ClawSolutions ClawSecurity ClawShield ClawGuard ClawWatch ClawScan ClawIntel ClawAnalytics ClawMetrics ClawData ClawIndex ClawOracle ClawFeed ClawSignal ClawStream ClawNetwork ClawMesh ClawCompute ClawServer ClawHost ClawDeploy ClawBuilder ClawConstructor ClawFramework ClawToolkit ClawSuite ClawWorkspace ClawDesk ClawPlatform ClawPortal ClawGateway ClawAccess ClawID ClawIdentity ClawPassport ClawSocial ClawConnect ClawMatch ClawSync ClawRelay ClawLoop ClawSphere ClawOrbit ClawCosmos ClawUniverse ClawFrontier ClawFront ClawEdge ClawPulse ClawWave ClawStorm ClawSpark ClawRise ClawMomentum ClawPrime ClawAlpha ClawInfinite

@DegenToDisciple Anyone ever noticed the misspelling of ‘trough’ in the top right graph? Glad my life savings have always depended on this retarded chart

Euphoria

@DegenToDisciple I’m saying no, but he does have the ability to send bitcoin to fucking zero from the grave

Would Epstein be good at Memecoins?