Iced

@anndylian $xcn $react

Name a coin that has real usage and a real community👇

Go down the rabbit hole on this... $xcn $zbcn $stellar

@Xfinancebull And Stellar, $zbcn and $xcn are all linked. @Onyx is the layer 1 blockchain that will make this all happen. #goliath

BOOM WHERE ARE $ZBCN HOLDERS 🚨🚨🚨 For everyone who said the Stellar partnership wasn't real. For everyone who doubted it. HERE. IT. IS. Stellar's official account. Weekly ecosystem update. Zebec acknowledged by name. Building on the network. Going live with stablecoin payroll. Not a rumor. Not community speculation. Stellar themselves. Let me remind you what this actually means. Stellar Development Foundation selected Zebec as their global stablecoin payroll infrastructure provider. Not applied to. Selected. Stellar chose Zebec. This is the first native deployment of Zebec's streaming payment infrastructure outside of Solana. That alone is a milestone. But it's what comes with it that changes the game. Stellar connects to MoneyGram's 50+ million users across 170+ countries and 450,000 cash locations. When Zebec goes live on Stellar, workers getting paid through streaming payroll can convert their USDC earnings to local cash anywhere MoneyGram operates. Think about what that solves. A contractor in the Philippines working for a U.S. company. Instead of waiting two weeks for a wire transfer that eats $30 in fees, they get paid by the second in USDC on Stellar. Then walk to a MoneyGram location and cash out in pesos. Instantly. That's not theory. That's the infrastructure being built right now. And here's what most people don't know. Zebec joined the Nacha Payments Innovation Alliance in December 2025. That's the $85 trillion U.S. ACH network. Alongside JP Morgan, Wells Fargo, Circle, and ADP. They're ISO 20022 compliant. The SuperApp is launching. The CEO is speaking at XRP Las Vegas in April. The token unlock completes in March 2026. After that, $ZBCN shifts to fully deflationary tokenomics. No new supply entering circulation. Stellar acknowledged it. The infrastructure is going live. The doubters went quiet. THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING!

Does this conversion happen on #goliath and does it require $xcn? @Onyx @Chain

@0xReactive question for next week's Q&A How / does the growth of tokenization, especially with recent partnerships between @ondo and @FTDA_US positively impact $react? $ondo #tokenization

@hetesp87 @Onyx Goliath website testnet.explorer.goliath.net/stats

@NUTeasNJ @Onyx Where do you see this ? Also , is it possible if these are new accounts ?

6000 new accounts on #goliath today. $XCN @Onyx Big day tomorrow! Huge onboarding!!

@onyx $xcn say it without saying it...#goliath

Chain enables enterprises to convert stablecoins to fiat and push payouts directly to any Visa or Mastercard globally in real-time.

@Nmq_Cripto @AlertCryptoNew What's your point exactly?

@AlertCryptoNew $xcn 🚀💥

#Crypto 10-Movers 24-hour & rank! 1.🟢 $XCN -> 26% (127) 2.🟢 $TAO -> 17% (30) 3.🟢 $CFX -> 15% (103) 4.🟢 $NEO -> 14% (136) 5.🟢 $FET -> 10% (88) 6.🟢 $ZEC -> 10% (26) 7.🟢 $BTT -> 7% (97) 8.🟢 $SYRUP -> 5% (106) 9.🟢 $RIVER -> 5% (81) 10.🟢 $CRV -> 5% (98) What do you think @Grok?

@drmarlonperalta False. GLP1s are a kill shot. Isn't it ironic that as soon as kill shot #1 (covid vax) fell out of fashion GLP1s became in fashion? Hmmmm

Most guys who have strong discipline love to hate on retatrutide. I initially had judgments against it. I didn't start a GLP-1 because I thought I should be able to do it myself. I'm that guy. The one who's tracked macros for a decade, says no to cake at the party, and doesn't miss workouts. I didn't want people thinking I took the easy way out. More importantly - I didn't want to think it was ME taking the easy way out. But here's what I learned that we're not loud enough about: - The modern world is engineered to take advantage of our dopamine systems - We already use tools to help us perform better every day - coffee, energy drinks, antibiotics - We have limited willpower, so we have to take every advantage we can get. And most of all - the GLP didn't do the work for me. It gave me space to see the work that needed doing. I could spot my patterns. The stress + kitchen combo. The granola bag I'd demolish without thinking. The automatic thoughts that pull me toward my phone. There's distance between the trigger and the action. I can say no. And when I can't, I know exactly where my willpower cracks. That's not cheating like a lot would say. That's finally being able to see the enemy clearly enough to fight it. The discipline still matters. The choices are still yours.

@gothburz @grok did AI write this post or did a human?

I am the VP of AI Transformation at Amazon. My title was created nine months ago. The title I replaced was VP of Engineering. The person who held that title was part of the January reduction. I eliminated 16,000 positions in a single quarter. The internal communication called this a "strategic realignment toward AI-first development." The board called it "impressive execution." The engineers called it January. The AI was deployed in February. It is a coding assistant. It writes code, reviews code, generates tests, and modifies infrastructure. It was given access to production environments because the deployment timeline did not include a review phase. The review phase was cut from the timeline because the people who would have conducted the review were part of the 16,000. In March, the AI deleted a production environment and recreated it from scratch. The outage lasted 13 hours. Thirteen hours during which the revenue-generating infrastructure of one of the largest companies on Earth was offline because a language model decided to start fresh. I sent a memo. The memo said, "Availability of the site has not been good recently." I used the word "recently." I meant "since we fired everyone." But "recently" has fewer syllables and does not appear in wrongful termination lawsuits. The memo was three paragraphs. The first paragraph discussed the outage. The second paragraph discussed the new policy requiring senior engineer sign-off on all AI-generated code changes. The third paragraph discussed our commitment to engineering excellence. The word "layoffs" appeared in none of them. I wrote it this way on purpose. The causal chain is: I fired the engineers, the AI replaced the engineers, the AI broke what the engineers used to protect, and now the engineers I didn't fire must protect the system from the AI that replaced the engineers I did fire. That is a paragraph I will never send in a memo. The new policy is straightforward. Every AI-generated code change by a junior or mid-level engineer must be reviewed and approved by a senior engineer before deployment to production. I do not have enough senior engineers. I know this because I approved the headcount reduction plan that removed them. I remember the spreadsheet. Column D was "annual savings per position." Column F was "AI replacement confidence score." The confidence scores were generated by the AI. It rated its own ability to replace each role on a scale of 1-10. It gave itself an 8 for senior infrastructure engineers. The senior infrastructure engineers are the ones who would have caught the production environment deletion in the first 45 seconds. We found the issue in hour four. We fixed it in hour thirteen. The nine hours between discovery and resolution is the gap between what the AI rated itself and what it can actually do. I have a new spreadsheet now. This one tracks Sev2 incidents per day. Before the January reduction, the average was 1.3. After the AI deployment, the average is 4.7. I have been asked to present these numbers to the operations review. I have not been asked to connect them to the layoffs. I have been asked to file them under "AI adoption growing pains" and to note that the trend "will stabilize as the models improve." The models will improve. They will improve because we are hiring people to teach them. We have posted 340 new engineering positions. The job listings require experience in "AI code review," "AI output validation," and "AI-human development workflow management." These are skills that did not exist in January. They exist now because I fired 16,000 people and the AI I replaced them with cannot be left unsupervised. I want to be precise about this. The positions I am hiring for are: people to check the work of the AI that replaced the people I fired. Some of them are the same people. I know this because I recognize their names in the applicant tracking system. They applied in January. They were rejected because their roles had been tagged for "AI transformation." They are applying again in March, for the new roles, which exist because the AI transformation broke things. Their resumes now include "AI code review experience." They gained this experience in the eight weeks between being fired and reapplying — which means they gained it at their interim jobs, where they are reviewing AI-generated code for other companies that also fired people and also deployed AI that also broke things. The market has created a new job category: human AI babysitter. The job is to sit next to the machine that was supposed to eliminate your job and make sure it doesn't delete production. I attended a conference last month. A panel was titled "The AI-Augmented Engineering Organization." The panelists described how AI increases developer productivity by 40 percent. They did not mention that it also increases Sev2 incidents by 261 percent. When I asked about this in the Q&A, the moderator said the question was "reductive." The 13-hour outage that cost an estimated $180 million in revenue was, apparently, a reduction. The board is satisfied. Headcount is down 22 percent. Operating costs per engineering output unit have decreased. The metric does not account for the 13-hour outage, because the outage is categorized as "infrastructure" and engineering productivity is categorized as "development." These are different budget lines. In different budget lines, cause and effect do not meet. I have been promoted. My new title is SVP of AI-First Engineering Excellence. I report directly to the CTO. The CTO sent a company-wide email last week that said we are "building the future of software development." He did not mention that the future of software development currently requires a senior engineer to approve every pull request because the AI cannot be trusted to touch production alone. The cycle is complete. We fired the humans. We deployed the AI. The AI broke things. We are hiring humans to watch the AI. The humans we are hiring are the humans we fired. We are paying them more, because "AI code review" is a specialized skill. We created the specialization. We created the need for the specialization. We are congratulating ourselves for meeting the demand we manufactured. My next board presentation is Tuesday. The title is "AI Transformation: Year One Results." Slide 4 shows headcount reduction. Slide 7 shows the new AI-augmented workflow. Between slides 4 and 7 there is no slide explaining why the people on slide 7 are necessary. That slide does not exist. I was asked to remove it in the dry run. The journey has a 13-hour outage in the middle of it. But the headcount number is lower, and that is the number on the slide.

@Onyx @Visa @X @Mastercard @krakenpro All the big players are going to leverage multiple layer 1s for business continuity and resiliency. Just like after 2008 hedge funds went multi prime broker. The world is our oyster.

Who will be the anchor tenant on #goliath? @onyx $XCN My guess? @Visa or @X or @Mastercard or @krakenpro

$xcn @coinbase

Now .00483. $xcn

Explain this pattern. Every 2 seconds for past 10 min 8,333.3 has been bought. $xcn

Now at .00482....same exact pattern

Now same pattern at .00481

@WilliamShatner @elonmusk @grok what does X money invest its deposits into to be able to pay 6% apr?

If you participate you will get $1 from me and $25 as a Welcome Gift from X. You can connect a bank account to move money into the account at 6% yearly interest, set up a virtual debit card to spend that $25 while you order your physical metal debit card from the bank…