正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

Anonymous holder burns 107 Bitcoin across five timelocked transactions An anonymous holder burned 107 bitcoin:native worth roughly $8.5 million on May 25 by sending it to the famous unspendable address 1111111111111111111114oLvT2. Five premeditated transactions, all timelocked to block 950,958, all paying unusually high fees. The originating wallets had been...

BSCNews's profile picture

BSCN

1,363,917 subscribers

24,398 次观看 • 3 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Sold 32 coins. Bought 1,550. 48 times more, at a 15% discount, into the crash the market blamed on the sale. Strategy disclosed today that while everyone panicked over its $2.5 million Bitcoin sale, it was quietly buying the dip that panic created. 1,550 Bitcoin for $101 million, at $65,332 a coin, far below the $77,135 it sold for and below its own cost basis. The bears called the sale the first crack, a forced liquidation, the start of the death spiral. The answer was a buy 48 times the size of the sale that scared them. This is the machine we described: a state-contingent allocator. Above its funding line, it turns market access into Bitcoin. The sale was the exception. The buy is the rule. It also closed the question the sale opened. The cash reserve behind the preferred dividends had thinned to $900 million, about six months of cover. He rebuilt it to $1 billion in the same week. But watch how, because that is the real story. He funded none of it with coins. He funded it with $181 million of freshly issued stock, then spent it on Bitcoin and the reserve. The coins were never the funding source. The equity is. That is the flywheel working exactly as built, and the cost of it surfacing at the same time. Every turn now runs on issuing shares, and the premium that once made each share buy more Bitcoin than it diluted has compressed hard. He bought low. He sold his own stock low to do it. So the question quietly turns. It was never whether Saylor sells his Bitcoin. He just proved again that he buys far more than he sells. It is what each turn of the engine now costs in dilution, and how long the market keeps paying a premium worth that cost. He bought the dip. The dip was partly his own making. And he paid for it in equity, not coins.
0:10

Sold 32 coins. Bought 1,550. 48 times more, at a 15% discount, into the crash the market blamed on the sale. Strategy disclosed today that while everyone panicked over its $2.5 million Bitcoin sale, it was quietly buying the dip that panic created. 1,550 Bitcoin for $101 million, at $65,332 a coin, far below the $77,135 it sold for and below its own cost basis. The bears called the sale the first crack, a forced liquidation, the start of the death spiral. The answer was a buy 48 times the size of the sale that scared them. This is the machine we described: a state-contingent allocator. Above its funding line, it turns market access into Bitcoin. The sale was the exception. The buy is the rule. It also closed the question the sale opened. The cash reserve behind the preferred dividends had thinned to $900 million, about six months of cover. He rebuilt it to $1 billion in the same week. But watch how, because that is the real story. He funded none of it with coins. He funded it with $181 million of freshly issued stock, then spent it on Bitcoin and the reserve. The coins were never the funding source. The equity is. That is the flywheel working exactly as built, and the cost of it surfacing at the same time. Every turn now runs on issuing shares, and the premium that once made each share buy more Bitcoin than it diluted has compressed hard. He bought low. He sold his own stock low to do it. So the question quietly turns. It was never whether Saylor sells his Bitcoin. He just proved again that he buys far more than he sells. It is what each turn of the engine now costs in dilution, and how long the market keeps paying a premium worth that cost. He bought the dip. The dip was partly his own making. And he paid for it in equity, not coins.

Shanaka Anslem Perera ⚡

142,587 次观看 • 3 个月前

The largest theft in history has already happened. The people behind it just cannot open what they stole yet. Right now, intelligence agencies and criminal groups are quietly copying the world's encrypted data, bank records, medical files, state secrets, private messages, and storing every byte untouched. They cannot read any of it. They are collecting it anyway, because they know the key is about to be invented. The strategy has a name, harvest now, decrypt later, and in 2026 it stopped being theory. Washington declared this the Year of Quantum Security in January, backed by the FBI, the NSA, and NIST. Canada ordered every federal agency to file a migration plan by April. Europe set its deadline for December. Governments do not impose operational deadlines on a someday problem. They do it when the clock is already running. Here is what moved the clock. Every password, every transfer, every secret on Earth is protected by one assumption, that a certain math problem is too hard to solve. Quantum computers solve exactly that problem. For years the machine that could do it looked decades away. Then in late 2025 Google's Willow chip cracked the hardest part of building one, and in March 2026 Google's own researchers estimated that breaking the encryption behind Bitcoin might take fewer than 500,000 qubits, down from 20 million, and could run in minutes. The day this becomes real has a name, Q-Day, and the latest estimates place it between 2030 and 2033. Now make it concrete. Roughly 6.5 million Bitcoin, about a third of every coin that will ever exist, worth close to 500 billion dollars, sit in addresses that have already exposed the very key a quantum computer needs. That includes the coins of Satoshi, the anonymous creator. On Q-Day they become, in the researchers' own word, trivially stealable. It would not look like a crash or a whale selling. It would look like half a trillion dollars of the most secure money ever built simply walking out the door. The asset designed to trust no one and no institution turns out to rest on a single unverified bet, that one math problem stays hard forever. This is what sits beneath the entire digital world. A bank balance, a Bitcoin, a classified cable, all of it is real only because of a proof you supposedly cannot forge. Quantum breaks the proof. Everything we call secure is true only until someone finally checks, and for the first time the check is visible on the horizon. You cannot know whether your data has already been copied. You cannot know the exact day the key arrives. The trust holding up the digital age is a clock counting down to a zero no one can see. The honest counter matters. No machine on Earth can break this encryption today, and serious cryptographers still argue the real threat is a decade or more away. The timeline is far from certain. Quantum-safe codes already exist, the migration has started, and Bitcoin can move its coins to safety before Q-Day if it acts in time. The danger is not that everything breaks tomorrow. It is that anything which must stay secret into the 2030s, a state secret, an identity, a private key, is being stolen today and is already on the clock. The breach is not coming. It is already here, sitting in storage, perfectly encrypted, waiting for a machine that does not exist yet to read it out loud. Research and opinion, not investment advice.
0:10

The largest theft in history has already happened. The people behind it just cannot open what they stole yet. Right now, intelligence agencies and criminal groups are quietly copying the world's encrypted data, bank records, medical files, state secrets, private messages, and storing every byte untouched. They cannot read any of it. They are collecting it anyway, because they know the key is about to be invented. The strategy has a name, harvest now, decrypt later, and in 2026 it stopped being theory. Washington declared this the Year of Quantum Security in January, backed by the FBI, the NSA, and NIST. Canada ordered every federal agency to file a migration plan by April. Europe set its deadline for December. Governments do not impose operational deadlines on a someday problem. They do it when the clock is already running. Here is what moved the clock. Every password, every transfer, every secret on Earth is protected by one assumption, that a certain math problem is too hard to solve. Quantum computers solve exactly that problem. For years the machine that could do it looked decades away. Then in late 2025 Google's Willow chip cracked the hardest part of building one, and in March 2026 Google's own researchers estimated that breaking the encryption behind Bitcoin might take fewer than 500,000 qubits, down from 20 million, and could run in minutes. The day this becomes real has a name, Q-Day, and the latest estimates place it between 2030 and 2033. Now make it concrete. Roughly 6.5 million Bitcoin, about a third of every coin that will ever exist, worth close to 500 billion dollars, sit in addresses that have already exposed the very key a quantum computer needs. That includes the coins of Satoshi, the anonymous creator. On Q-Day they become, in the researchers' own word, trivially stealable. It would not look like a crash or a whale selling. It would look like half a trillion dollars of the most secure money ever built simply walking out the door. The asset designed to trust no one and no institution turns out to rest on a single unverified bet, that one math problem stays hard forever. This is what sits beneath the entire digital world. A bank balance, a Bitcoin, a classified cable, all of it is real only because of a proof you supposedly cannot forge. Quantum breaks the proof. Everything we call secure is true only until someone finally checks, and for the first time the check is visible on the horizon. You cannot know whether your data has already been copied. You cannot know the exact day the key arrives. The trust holding up the digital age is a clock counting down to a zero no one can see. The honest counter matters. No machine on Earth can break this encryption today, and serious cryptographers still argue the real threat is a decade or more away. The timeline is far from certain. Quantum-safe codes already exist, the migration has started, and Bitcoin can move its coins to safety before Q-Day if it acts in time. The danger is not that everything breaks tomorrow. It is that anything which must stay secret into the 2030s, a state secret, an identity, a private key, is being stolen today and is already on the clock. The breach is not coming. It is already here, sitting in storage, perfectly encrypted, waiting for a machine that does not exist yet to read it out loud. Research and opinion, not investment advice.

Shanaka Anslem Perera ⚡

185,548 次观看 • 2 个月前

The Celo Ethereum L2 has been ON FIRE in 2026 so far. Since transitioning to an Ethereum Layer-2 network, Celo has been on a tear. We’ve picked some of its biggest milestones from 2026 that you might have missed… (1) The network has now processed a total of more than 1.3 billion transactions [1.329 billion to be more precise]. Suffice to say this figure speaks for itself. (2) A peak daily user count of ~840,000 made Celo one of the most used Ethereum L2 networks in existence. The data comes from a report published on Bitget in April 2026, that report also pointing to a peak of some ~1.3 million monthly active users. (3) MiniPay, the stablecoin-focused wallet built on $CELO, now has more than 15 million registered wallets and has facilitated over 420 million transactions. Given its traction, MiniPay has become a key method for onboarding non-crypto-native users to the Celo ecosystem. (4) Celo’s network revenue has exploded, reaching an all-time high of ~$18,600 on May 18 of this year. On an annualised basis, this works out to an impressive $6.785 million according to growthepie 🥧📏. It equates to an increase of +218% over the past year and is the result of Celo’s tokenomic changes, one of which involved increasing the network’s base fee (something that Celo has achieved while maintaining sub-cent transaction costs).
0:19

The Celo Ethereum L2 has been ON FIRE in 2026 so far. Since transitioning to an Ethereum Layer-2 network, Celo has been on a tear. We’ve picked some of its biggest milestones from 2026 that you might have missed… (1) The network has now processed a total of more than 1.3 billion transactions [1.329 billion to be more precise]. Suffice to say this figure speaks for itself. (2) A peak daily user count of ~840,000 made Celo one of the most used Ethereum L2 networks in existence. The data comes from a report published on Bitget in April 2026, that report also pointing to a peak of some ~1.3 million monthly active users. (3) MiniPay, the stablecoin-focused wallet built on $CELO, now has more than 15 million registered wallets and has facilitated over 420 million transactions. Given its traction, MiniPay has become a key method for onboarding non-crypto-native users to the Celo ecosystem. (4) Celo’s network revenue has exploded, reaching an all-time high of ~$18,600 on May 18 of this year. On an annualised basis, this works out to an impressive $6.785 million according to growthepie 🥧📏. It equates to an increase of +218% over the past year and is the result of Celo’s tokenomic changes, one of which involved increasing the network’s base fee (something that Celo has achieved while maintaining sub-cent transaction costs).

BSCN

14,281 次观看 • 3 个月前

BEWARE buyers and sellers! E&L Poké Rips and I agreed to a $3,420 deal on an psa 9 error Coro Coro Mew, at the time there was no recent sales data on the card and I took the risk on the card paying over current 9 normal comps. An auction for a psa 8 at the time of deal was at $1200. I sent over the money and it was confirmed. That auction today finished high and now he has backed out of the deal, he had also transferred the money immediately and was not able to send an immediate refund. Both actions in my opinion are terrible ways to do business and I advise caution dealing with someone who’s willing to back out of a deal this large just because he “lost value”. Especially since I essentially took all the risk betting on the auction since now that it finished well he’s is just not going to send the card. (I bet it would’ve been sent if the auction finished low :) ) I have attached a screen recording of our entire convo including the deal we made I have now received my refund and feel comfortable sending this post.
0:33

BEWARE buyers and sellers! E&L Poké Rips and I agreed to a $3,420 deal on an psa 9 error Coro Coro Mew, at the time there was no recent sales data on the card and I took the risk on the card paying over current 9 normal comps. An auction for a psa 8 at the time of deal was at $1200. I sent over the money and it was confirmed. That auction today finished high and now he has backed out of the deal, he had also transferred the money immediately and was not able to send an immediate refund. Both actions in my opinion are terrible ways to do business and I advise caution dealing with someone who’s willing to back out of a deal this large just because he “lost value”. Especially since I essentially took all the risk betting on the auction since now that it finished well he’s is just not going to send the card. (I bet it would’ve been sent if the auction finished low :) ) I have attached a screen recording of our entire convo including the deal we made I have now received my refund and feel comfortable sending this post.

Mitchell Cox

251,426 次观看 • 6 个月前

32 coins. $2.5 million. 0.0038% of the stack. That is the sale the market is now blaming for a $3 billion liquidation cascade and a Bitcoin price nearly halved from its peak. A $2.5 million sale cannot move a trillion-dollar asset. It is a rounding error. In the same week, Strategy raised $128.3 million selling its own stock, 50 times larger. It did not need to sell coins. It chose to. The crash has real drivers: a record 13-day run of ETF outflows, a rotation into AI, a Fed in no hurry to cut. But the accelerant the market keeps naming is 32 coins. The coins were never the point. The signal was. And the signal was deliberate. Michael Saylor told the Q1 call he would “probably sell some bitcoin to pay a dividend just to inoculate the market and send the message that we did it.” His logic was sound: prove the Bitcoin is usable capital, not a vault that can never be opened, and show he is not a prisoner of his own vow. His “never sell” always meant be a net accumulator. He is up more than 170,000 coins this year against the 32 he sold, and he scores himself on one number, Bitcoin per share. By that math, defending the dividend with a sliver was discipline, not distress. The market read it as the opposite. The dose became the catalyst now blamed for the crash. The inoculation became the infection. Because what changed was never Strategy’s solvency. It was its identity. The market has stopped pricing a permanent holder and started pricing what the filings always described: a state-contingent allocator now funding its own preferred dividends, at the margin, from the Bitcoin beneath them. And the buffer is thinning. The cash reserve behind those dividends has fallen from $2.25 billion to $900 million. Against a preferred bill near $1.7 billion a year, that is roughly 6 months of runway. Be precise. This is not a death spiral. Strategy still holds 843,706 Bitcoin, worth more than $50 billion even now, and has more funding levers than almost any company alive. A real rally makes this a footnote, and the sell-side calling the reaction overdone is not wrong on the fundamentals. But the regime has changed. The question is no longer Bitcoin’s price on any given day. It is the cadence of the dividend declarations and the path of that reserve. Bitcoin did not acquire a yield. The wrapper acquired liabilities. This week the market learned that difference costs far more than 32 coins.
0:10

32 coins. $2.5 million. 0.0038% of the stack. That is the sale the market is now blaming for a $3 billion liquidation cascade and a Bitcoin price nearly halved from its peak. A $2.5 million sale cannot move a trillion-dollar asset. It is a rounding error. In the same week, Strategy raised $128.3 million selling its own stock, 50 times larger. It did not need to sell coins. It chose to. The crash has real drivers: a record 13-day run of ETF outflows, a rotation into AI, a Fed in no hurry to cut. But the accelerant the market keeps naming is 32 coins. The coins were never the point. The signal was. And the signal was deliberate. Michael Saylor told the Q1 call he would “probably sell some bitcoin to pay a dividend just to inoculate the market and send the message that we did it.” His logic was sound: prove the Bitcoin is usable capital, not a vault that can never be opened, and show he is not a prisoner of his own vow. His “never sell” always meant be a net accumulator. He is up more than 170,000 coins this year against the 32 he sold, and he scores himself on one number, Bitcoin per share. By that math, defending the dividend with a sliver was discipline, not distress. The market read it as the opposite. The dose became the catalyst now blamed for the crash. The inoculation became the infection. Because what changed was never Strategy’s solvency. It was its identity. The market has stopped pricing a permanent holder and started pricing what the filings always described: a state-contingent allocator now funding its own preferred dividends, at the margin, from the Bitcoin beneath them. And the buffer is thinning. The cash reserve behind those dividends has fallen from $2.25 billion to $900 million. Against a preferred bill near $1.7 billion a year, that is roughly 6 months of runway. Be precise. This is not a death spiral. Strategy still holds 843,706 Bitcoin, worth more than $50 billion even now, and has more funding levers than almost any company alive. A real rally makes this a footnote, and the sell-side calling the reaction overdone is not wrong on the fundamentals. But the regime has changed. The question is no longer Bitcoin’s price on any given day. It is the cadence of the dividend declarations and the path of that reserve. Bitcoin did not acquire a yield. The wrapper acquired liabilities. This week the market learned that difference costs far more than 32 coins.

Shanaka Anslem Perera ⚡

165,572 次观看 • 3 个月前

🚀ASST TO $700 PER SHARE?!?🚀 YOU THINK I'M JOKING? THINK AGAIN, BUCKO. Current ASST snapshot: BTC holdings: 15,000.5 BTC BTC price: $80,593 Bitcoin NAV: $1.21B Total debt: $10M Preferred outstanding: $495.95M Debt + preferred: $505.95M Amplification ratio: 41.9% Current stock price: $15.85 Now here’s the model, and this isn't MOONBOY NONSENSE, kids. This is with Bitcoin at $750k in 2036, not $1 million in 2034. ASST maintains their current 41.9% amplification ratio for 10 years. Translation for normal people: For every $1.00 of Bitcoin NAV, ASST keeps roughly $0.419 of senior claims through debt/preferred financing. The bears hear that and immediately start sweating through a Men’s Wearhouse suit. But this is the actual machine. As Bitcoin rises, the Bitcoin NAV rises. When the NAV rises, the old preferred stack becomes smaller relative to the treasury. So ASST issues more SATA to keep amplification at 41.9%. That new SATA capital buys more Bitcoin. Then Bitcoin goes up again. Then the NAV goes up again. Then the amplification ratio drops again. Then they issue more SATA again. Then they buy more Bitcoin again. This is how you turn a balance sheet into a legally registered orange crocodile. Now we add the funding mix: 75% of new Bitcoin accumulation comes from SATA. 25% comes from issuing common stock. And the common stock is issued at 1.2x EV mNAV. Meaning they are selling equity at a 20% premium to the enterprise value of the Bitcoin stack. That matters. Because issuing common below NAV is financial self-harm. Issuing common above NAV is accretive treasury sorcery. Now assume Bitcoin compounds at 25% per year for 10 years. BTC price goes from: $80,593 today to roughly: $750,579 in year 10 That is a 9.3x move in Bitcoin. Now what happens to ASST? Starting BTC stack: 15,000.5 BTC Projected year 10 BTC stack: 143,425 BTC That is 9.6x more Bitcoin. Starting Bitcoin NAV: $1.21B Projected year 10 Bitcoin NAV: $107.65B That is 89x larger. Now the bears will say: “BUT THE PREFERREDS!” Yes, Carl. The preferreds are the point. Senior claims rise from $505.95M to $45.11B because the model intentionally keeps amplification at 41.9%. That sounds terrifying until you remember the Bitcoin NAV grew to $107.65B. The stack got bigger. The senior claims got bigger. The common equity claim got bigger too. This is where CEBE comes in. CEBE = Common Equity Bitcoin Exposure. It answers the only question that matters: After debt and preferred holders get their claim, how much Bitcoin exposure does the common shareholder really own? Today: Gross BPS: 20,222 sats CEBE/share: 11,759 sats Year 10: Gross BPS: 95,380 sats CEBE/share: 55,416 sats That means common-equity Bitcoin exposure per share rises about 4.7x. Even after common issuance. Even after maintaining the preferred stack. Even after the bears finish their sacred ritual of screaming “DILUTION” into a spreadsheet they opened sideways. Now the share count. Current implied diluted shares: 74.2M Projected year 10 shares: 150.4M So yes, the share count roughly doubles in this model. But the Bitcoin stack goes 9.6x. This is the entire game. If Bitcoin holdings grow much faster than shares outstanding, the common shareholder’s Bitcoin exposure goes up. The bears think all issuance is bad because they learned finance from a Yahoo message board during a divorce. The actual question is: Does issuance increase Bitcoin per share after senior claims? In this model, yes. Now the stock price. Strict 1.2x EV mNAV model gets ASST to about: $559/share But if we anchor the model to today’s actual ASST price of $15.85, the same growth path gets you to roughly: $696/share Call it $700. There it is. ASST to $700 per share is not “vibes.” It is a model. BTC compounds at 25%. SATA funds 75% of accumulation. Common funds 25% at 1.2x EV mNAV. Amplification stays at 41.9%. BTC stack grows from 15,000 BTC to 143,425 BTC. Bitcoin NAV goes from $1.21B to $107.65B. CEBE/share goes from 11,759 sats to 55,416 sats. The stock goes from $15.85 to roughly $700. This is why small Bitcoin treasury companies are so insane. Strategy is the Death Star. ASST is the weird little orange lab experiment in the basement where someone accidentally discovers corporate finance methamphetamine. Tiny denominator. Preferred financing. Bitcoin accumulation. Premium equity issuance. CEBE expansion. A compounding treasury loop. The bear case is that dilution kills the common. The bull case is that accretive dilution plus preferred financing creates a Bitcoin-per-share machine that eats capital markets and leaves behind a pile of traumatized short sellers asking why their model still says “book value.” ASST to $700? If the machine works, yes. If Bitcoin does 25% CAGR, absolutely possible. If SATA scales and common gets issued above NAV, the goblin gets fed. And once the goblin gets fed, the spreadsheet starts looking like it was written by Saylor, Dylan LeClair, and a sleep-deprived Austrian economist locked inside a treasury dashboard with three Celsius energy drinks. This is not financial advice. This is FINANCIAL ENTERTAINMENT:
0:20

🚀ASST TO $700 PER SHARE?!?🚀 YOU THINK I'M JOKING? THINK AGAIN, BUCKO. Current ASST snapshot: BTC holdings: 15,000.5 BTC BTC price: $80,593 Bitcoin NAV: $1.21B Total debt: $10M Preferred outstanding: $495.95M Debt + preferred: $505.95M Amplification ratio: 41.9% Current stock price: $15.85 Now here’s the model, and this isn't MOONBOY NONSENSE, kids. This is with Bitcoin at $750k in 2036, not $1 million in 2034. ASST maintains their current 41.9% amplification ratio for 10 years. Translation for normal people: For every $1.00 of Bitcoin NAV, ASST keeps roughly $0.419 of senior claims through debt/preferred financing. The bears hear that and immediately start sweating through a Men’s Wearhouse suit. But this is the actual machine. As Bitcoin rises, the Bitcoin NAV rises. When the NAV rises, the old preferred stack becomes smaller relative to the treasury. So ASST issues more SATA to keep amplification at 41.9%. That new SATA capital buys more Bitcoin. Then Bitcoin goes up again. Then the NAV goes up again. Then the amplification ratio drops again. Then they issue more SATA again. Then they buy more Bitcoin again. This is how you turn a balance sheet into a legally registered orange crocodile. Now we add the funding mix: 75% of new Bitcoin accumulation comes from SATA. 25% comes from issuing common stock. And the common stock is issued at 1.2x EV mNAV. Meaning they are selling equity at a 20% premium to the enterprise value of the Bitcoin stack. That matters. Because issuing common below NAV is financial self-harm. Issuing common above NAV is accretive treasury sorcery. Now assume Bitcoin compounds at 25% per year for 10 years. BTC price goes from: $80,593 today to roughly: $750,579 in year 10 That is a 9.3x move in Bitcoin. Now what happens to ASST? Starting BTC stack: 15,000.5 BTC Projected year 10 BTC stack: 143,425 BTC That is 9.6x more Bitcoin. Starting Bitcoin NAV: $1.21B Projected year 10 Bitcoin NAV: $107.65B That is 89x larger. Now the bears will say: “BUT THE PREFERREDS!” Yes, Carl. The preferreds are the point. Senior claims rise from $505.95M to $45.11B because the model intentionally keeps amplification at 41.9%. That sounds terrifying until you remember the Bitcoin NAV grew to $107.65B. The stack got bigger. The senior claims got bigger. The common equity claim got bigger too. This is where CEBE comes in. CEBE = Common Equity Bitcoin Exposure. It answers the only question that matters: After debt and preferred holders get their claim, how much Bitcoin exposure does the common shareholder really own? Today: Gross BPS: 20,222 sats CEBE/share: 11,759 sats Year 10: Gross BPS: 95,380 sats CEBE/share: 55,416 sats That means common-equity Bitcoin exposure per share rises about 4.7x. Even after common issuance. Even after maintaining the preferred stack. Even after the bears finish their sacred ritual of screaming “DILUTION” into a spreadsheet they opened sideways. Now the share count. Current implied diluted shares: 74.2M Projected year 10 shares: 150.4M So yes, the share count roughly doubles in this model. But the Bitcoin stack goes 9.6x. This is the entire game. If Bitcoin holdings grow much faster than shares outstanding, the common shareholder’s Bitcoin exposure goes up. The bears think all issuance is bad because they learned finance from a Yahoo message board during a divorce. The actual question is: Does issuance increase Bitcoin per share after senior claims? In this model, yes. Now the stock price. Strict 1.2x EV mNAV model gets ASST to about: $559/share But if we anchor the model to today’s actual ASST price of $15.85, the same growth path gets you to roughly: $696/share Call it $700. There it is. ASST to $700 per share is not “vibes.” It is a model. BTC compounds at 25%. SATA funds 75% of accumulation. Common funds 25% at 1.2x EV mNAV. Amplification stays at 41.9%. BTC stack grows from 15,000 BTC to 143,425 BTC. Bitcoin NAV goes from $1.21B to $107.65B. CEBE/share goes from 11,759 sats to 55,416 sats. The stock goes from $15.85 to roughly $700. This is why small Bitcoin treasury companies are so insane. Strategy is the Death Star. ASST is the weird little orange lab experiment in the basement where someone accidentally discovers corporate finance methamphetamine. Tiny denominator. Preferred financing. Bitcoin accumulation. Premium equity issuance. CEBE expansion. A compounding treasury loop. The bear case is that dilution kills the common. The bull case is that accretive dilution plus preferred financing creates a Bitcoin-per-share machine that eats capital markets and leaves behind a pile of traumatized short sellers asking why their model still says “book value.” ASST to $700? If the machine works, yes. If Bitcoin does 25% CAGR, absolutely possible. If SATA scales and common gets issued above NAV, the goblin gets fed. And once the goblin gets fed, the spreadsheet starts looking like it was written by Saylor, Dylan LeClair, and a sleep-deprived Austrian economist locked inside a treasury dashboard with three Celsius energy drinks. This is not financial advice. This is FINANCIAL ENTERTAINMENT:

Adam Livingston

66,707 次观看 • 4 个月前

The biggest Bitcoin miners on earth are quietly walking away from mining Bitcoin, and the reason is not the one everyone keeps repeating. They are not fleeing a dead business. They lost an auction for their own power, and the winner was artificial intelligence. Start with the brutal arithmetic. It now costs the average public miner around $80,000 in cash to produce a single Bitcoin, and for stretches of this year $BTC traded below that. The most efficient operators on the cheapest power still clear a margin, but an estimated 15 to 20 percent of the global fleet is mining at a loss right now, burning more in power than the coins are worth the second they are minted. Three straight downward difficulty adjustments earlier this year, the first such streak since 2022, were the footprint of machines going dark. That looks like a simple story of a broken business until you see the number that explains the exodus. The same megawatt of power that earns a Bitcoin miner roughly $1 million a year earns between $10 and $20 million a year hosting AI compute. Ten to twenty times more, for the identical electricity, substation, and cooling. What made industrial miners valuable was never the mining. It was the power contracts, the land, the grid interconnects. AI walked in and bid an order of magnitude higher for exactly those assets. Mining did not fail. It got outbid for its own infrastructure. When Core Scientific runs its BTC segment at a negative margin while its AI colocation business prints money, the decision writes itself. CoinShares estimates listed miners could pull up to 70 percent of their revenue from AI by year end, up from about 30 percent. The power is being repriced to its highest use, and Bitcoin lost the bidding. If the giants leave, what happens to the network they secured? The doom posts assume it weakens. It does not, because Bitcoin has a self-healing reflex written into its core. When miners switch off, blocks slow, and within two weeks difficulty automatically drops, which makes mining cheaper and more profitable for everyone still running. The security does not vanish, it relocates, and you can already see where. State-backed pools are appearing, with one Gulf operator reportedly standing up a national pool near 3 percent of global hashrate, alongside private fleets and the handful of public miners like Marathon still choosing to buy Bitcoin rather than lease their power away. The network even hit an all-time high above one zettahash this year as the pivot accelerated. It does not need any particular miner. It needs someone, somewhere, for whom the math still works, and cheap stranded power has no shortage of those. But there is a deeper timer here, and the AI pivot just exposed it. Today miners earn almost everything from the block subsidy and almost nothing from fees, often under one percent of revenue on a quiet day. That subsidy halves again in 2028, and every four years after, marching toward zero. For Bitcoin to pay for its own security forever, fees eventually have to replace it. The open question is whether they can, and the evidence cuts both ways. On busy days, during token launches and inscription waves, fees have already spiked past 15 percent of revenue, and in 2024 some blocks earned more in fees than the entire subsidy. The capacity is there in bursts. Whether bursts become a baseline is the single most important unanswered question in Bitcoin. The AI exodus did not create that question. It pulled the cover off it years early, and showed how fast capital abandons hashing the moment something pays more. So the honest read is not that AI kills Bitcoin mining. It is stranger than that. AI is the first bidder rich enough to reveal what Bitcoin's security was always quietly worth, and what it will cost to keep once the free coins stop coming. The miners are not abandoning a sinking ship. They are selling the deck to a higher bidder while the same clock everyone forgot about keeps ticking underneath.
0:10

The biggest Bitcoin miners on earth are quietly walking away from mining Bitcoin, and the reason is not the one everyone keeps repeating. They are not fleeing a dead business. They lost an auction for their own power, and the winner was artificial intelligence. Start with the brutal arithmetic. It now costs the average public miner around $80,000 in cash to produce a single Bitcoin, and for stretches of this year $BTC traded below that. The most efficient operators on the cheapest power still clear a margin, but an estimated 15 to 20 percent of the global fleet is mining at a loss right now, burning more in power than the coins are worth the second they are minted. Three straight downward difficulty adjustments earlier this year, the first such streak since 2022, were the footprint of machines going dark. That looks like a simple story of a broken business until you see the number that explains the exodus. The same megawatt of power that earns a Bitcoin miner roughly $1 million a year earns between $10 and $20 million a year hosting AI compute. Ten to twenty times more, for the identical electricity, substation, and cooling. What made industrial miners valuable was never the mining. It was the power contracts, the land, the grid interconnects. AI walked in and bid an order of magnitude higher for exactly those assets. Mining did not fail. It got outbid for its own infrastructure. When Core Scientific runs its BTC segment at a negative margin while its AI colocation business prints money, the decision writes itself. CoinShares estimates listed miners could pull up to 70 percent of their revenue from AI by year end, up from about 30 percent. The power is being repriced to its highest use, and Bitcoin lost the bidding. If the giants leave, what happens to the network they secured? The doom posts assume it weakens. It does not, because Bitcoin has a self-healing reflex written into its core. When miners switch off, blocks slow, and within two weeks difficulty automatically drops, which makes mining cheaper and more profitable for everyone still running. The security does not vanish, it relocates, and you can already see where. State-backed pools are appearing, with one Gulf operator reportedly standing up a national pool near 3 percent of global hashrate, alongside private fleets and the handful of public miners like Marathon still choosing to buy Bitcoin rather than lease their power away. The network even hit an all-time high above one zettahash this year as the pivot accelerated. It does not need any particular miner. It needs someone, somewhere, for whom the math still works, and cheap stranded power has no shortage of those. But there is a deeper timer here, and the AI pivot just exposed it. Today miners earn almost everything from the block subsidy and almost nothing from fees, often under one percent of revenue on a quiet day. That subsidy halves again in 2028, and every four years after, marching toward zero. For Bitcoin to pay for its own security forever, fees eventually have to replace it. The open question is whether they can, and the evidence cuts both ways. On busy days, during token launches and inscription waves, fees have already spiked past 15 percent of revenue, and in 2024 some blocks earned more in fees than the entire subsidy. The capacity is there in bursts. Whether bursts become a baseline is the single most important unanswered question in Bitcoin. The AI exodus did not create that question. It pulled the cover off it years early, and showed how fast capital abandons hashing the moment something pays more. So the honest read is not that AI kills Bitcoin mining. It is stranger than that. AI is the first bidder rich enough to reveal what Bitcoin's security was always quietly worth, and what it will cost to keep once the free coins stop coming. The miners are not abandoning a sinking ship. They are selling the deck to a higher bidder while the same clock everyone forgot about keeps ticking underneath.

Shanaka Anslem Perera ⚡

90,812 次观看 • 2 个月前

Saylor’s Bitcoin Machine Meets the Cash Reality The real story is not that Strategy may sell up to $1.25B of Bitcoin. The bigger story is that it has moved from a simple accumulation narrative into a complex capital markets machine. The old pitch was buy Bitcoin, never sell, increase Bitcoin per share. The new structure has preferred stock, convertible debt, reserves, buybacks, dividend obligations, and now a BTC monetization plan. That shift matters because Bitcoin does not produce cash flow. Preferred dividends and interest expense do. Strategy says it has about $2.55B in USD reserves and roughly $1.76B in annual preferred dividend and interest obligations. That sounds like about 17 months of coverage, but that number is static. It assumes no future dividend increases, no stress, no buybacks, no taxes, no transaction costs, and no deterioration in capital market access. If they keep raising the STRC dividend to defend the price near par, the cash burn rises and the runway gets shorter. The Digital Credit Problem STRC is marketed as digital credit, but economically it behaves like a high yield perpetual preferred stock tied to confidence in a Bitcoin balance sheet. It is not normal debt because there is no traditional maturity. It is not common equity because it sits ahead of common shareholders and carries a large cash distribution expectation. The design is clever but circular. STRC’s dividend can be adjusted to keep the security near $99 to $100. The dividend was raised to 12%, which may support the price, but it also raises cash burn. If STRC trades below par, Strategy may raise the dividend again. If the dividend rises, the reserve coverage shrinks. If cash gets tight, Strategy needs new issuance, reserves, or Bitcoin sales. The compounding issue makes the structure even more fragile. If dividends are paid on time, they do not compound against the company. But if payments are deferred or missed, unpaid dividends can accumulate and compound monthly until paid. That means a liquidity problem does not just sit there. It can grow on itself. Where The Fragility Lives Strategy owns a volatile, non cash flowing asset and has layered cash obligations on top of it. That works when Bitcoin rises, MSTR trades at a premium, and investors are hungry for yield. It gets harder when Bitcoin falls, spreads widen, or investors demand higher returns. Selling Bitcoin now changes the narrative. Bitcoin is no longer just the sacred reserve asset. It is now a liquidity backstop for dividends, reserves, interest, and buybacks. The $1.25B monetization program adds runway, but it also proves the point. Cash promises need cash sources. That creates the feedback loop. If Bitcoin falls, asset coverage weakens. If STRC trades lower, required yields rise. If yields rise, Strategy may need to raise the dividend. If the dividend rises, cash burn accelerates. If issuance slows, reserves get used. If reserves fall, Bitcoin sales become more likely. If those sales look defensive, confidence weakens further. My Take Common shareholders own the upside, but they sit below debt and preferred claims. Preferred holders get high yield, but they rely on Strategy’s ability to maintain reserves, issue securities, monetize Bitcoin, and keep market confidence intact. This is no longer just a Bitcoin bet. It is a Bitcoin liquidity bet, a capital markets access bet, and a confidence bet. Strategy can survive if Bitcoin rises, MSTR keeps a premium, and yield investors keep funding the machine. If two fail at once, the model becomes fragile. The key red flags are STRC below par, dividend hikes that fail to restore the price, reserve coverage under 12 months, unpaid dividends compounding, visible Bitcoin sales, MSTR near or below NAV, and preferred yields widening. The structure can work, but not forever on narrative alone. Eventually, cash obligations meet cash sources. That is where the risk lives.
0:11

Saylor’s Bitcoin Machine Meets the Cash Reality The real story is not that Strategy may sell up to $1.25B of Bitcoin. The bigger story is that it has moved from a simple accumulation narrative into a complex capital markets machine. The old pitch was buy Bitcoin, never sell, increase Bitcoin per share. The new structure has preferred stock, convertible debt, reserves, buybacks, dividend obligations, and now a BTC monetization plan. That shift matters because Bitcoin does not produce cash flow. Preferred dividends and interest expense do. Strategy says it has about $2.55B in USD reserves and roughly $1.76B in annual preferred dividend and interest obligations. That sounds like about 17 months of coverage, but that number is static. It assumes no future dividend increases, no stress, no buybacks, no taxes, no transaction costs, and no deterioration in capital market access. If they keep raising the STRC dividend to defend the price near par, the cash burn rises and the runway gets shorter. The Digital Credit Problem STRC is marketed as digital credit, but economically it behaves like a high yield perpetual preferred stock tied to confidence in a Bitcoin balance sheet. It is not normal debt because there is no traditional maturity. It is not common equity because it sits ahead of common shareholders and carries a large cash distribution expectation. The design is clever but circular. STRC’s dividend can be adjusted to keep the security near $99 to $100. The dividend was raised to 12%, which may support the price, but it also raises cash burn. If STRC trades below par, Strategy may raise the dividend again. If the dividend rises, the reserve coverage shrinks. If cash gets tight, Strategy needs new issuance, reserves, or Bitcoin sales. The compounding issue makes the structure even more fragile. If dividends are paid on time, they do not compound against the company. But if payments are deferred or missed, unpaid dividends can accumulate and compound monthly until paid. That means a liquidity problem does not just sit there. It can grow on itself. Where The Fragility Lives Strategy owns a volatile, non cash flowing asset and has layered cash obligations on top of it. That works when Bitcoin rises, MSTR trades at a premium, and investors are hungry for yield. It gets harder when Bitcoin falls, spreads widen, or investors demand higher returns. Selling Bitcoin now changes the narrative. Bitcoin is no longer just the sacred reserve asset. It is now a liquidity backstop for dividends, reserves, interest, and buybacks. The $1.25B monetization program adds runway, but it also proves the point. Cash promises need cash sources. That creates the feedback loop. If Bitcoin falls, asset coverage weakens. If STRC trades lower, required yields rise. If yields rise, Strategy may need to raise the dividend. If the dividend rises, cash burn accelerates. If issuance slows, reserves get used. If reserves fall, Bitcoin sales become more likely. If those sales look defensive, confidence weakens further. My Take Common shareholders own the upside, but they sit below debt and preferred claims. Preferred holders get high yield, but they rely on Strategy’s ability to maintain reserves, issue securities, monetize Bitcoin, and keep market confidence intact. This is no longer just a Bitcoin bet. It is a Bitcoin liquidity bet, a capital markets access bet, and a confidence bet. Strategy can survive if Bitcoin rises, MSTR keeps a premium, and yield investors keep funding the machine. If two fail at once, the model becomes fragile. The key red flags are STRC below par, dividend hikes that fail to restore the price, reserve coverage under 12 months, unpaid dividends compounding, visible Bitcoin sales, MSTR near or below NAV, and preferred yields widening. The structure can work, but not forever on narrative alone. Eventually, cash obligations meet cash sources. That is where the risk lives.

EndGame Macro

33,374 次观看 • 2 个月前

Last night I asked Claude Code to build me a simple script: pull on-chain data from Polymarket and sort wallets by win rate Nothing ambitious. Just wanted to see who is actually making money on 15-minute BTC markets The terminal finished in about 20 minutes. Hundreds of addresses, columns of numbers, nothing interesting And then 1 wallet caught my eye 200+ trades per day, consistent profit every week, almost surgical timing precision. I reread the line 3 times. A real person does not trade like this I fed the address back into Claude Code and asked it to break down the pattern. Half an hour later I had a full strategy reconstruction on my screen The bot (and it is definitely a bot) pings Binance and Bybit every 100ms monitoring volatility compression on BTC. When it drops below 0.08% it enters Up and Down contracts simultaneously at 25 to 35 cents each. A pure straddle. 1 side burns, the other flies to a dollar. At a 30-cent entry that is 3 to 4x per position And so it goes in circles. Dozens of times a day I sat there staring at it for about 10 minutes $13K to $25K in daily profit from a single wallet. Not a trader with intuition, not an insider with information. An algorithm that found a hole in market mechanics and methodically milks it You can check the trade history yourself: After that I went looking for whether anyone else is tracking this wallet. Turns out yes. Found a Telegram bot that tracks wallets like this and copies their trades automatically I connected it to the same address just to see if the entries would match what my terminal was showing. Matched perfectly Still testing on minimum amounts for now: But the fact that you can stand next to an algorithm like this in real time is something that simply did not exist a year ago
0:16

Last night I asked Claude Code to build me a simple script: pull on-chain data from Polymarket and sort wallets by win rate Nothing ambitious. Just wanted to see who is actually making money on 15-minute BTC markets The terminal finished in about 20 minutes. Hundreds of addresses, columns of numbers, nothing interesting And then 1 wallet caught my eye 200+ trades per day, consistent profit every week, almost surgical timing precision. I reread the line 3 times. A real person does not trade like this I fed the address back into Claude Code and asked it to break down the pattern. Half an hour later I had a full strategy reconstruction on my screen The bot (and it is definitely a bot) pings Binance and Bybit every 100ms monitoring volatility compression on BTC. When it drops below 0.08% it enters Up and Down contracts simultaneously at 25 to 35 cents each. A pure straddle. 1 side burns, the other flies to a dollar. At a 30-cent entry that is 3 to 4x per position And so it goes in circles. Dozens of times a day I sat there staring at it for about 10 minutes $13K to $25K in daily profit from a single wallet. Not a trader with intuition, not an insider with information. An algorithm that found a hole in market mechanics and methodically milks it You can check the trade history yourself: After that I went looking for whether anyone else is tracking this wallet. Turns out yes. Found a Telegram bot that tracks wallets like this and copies their trades automatically I connected it to the same address just to see if the entries would match what my terminal was showing. Matched perfectly Still testing on minimum amounts for now: But the fact that you can stand next to an algorithm like this in real time is something that simply did not exist a year ago

Blaze

488,672 次观看 • 6 个月前

The Christopher Columbus Memorial Fountain right in front of Union Station. It had been dry and in pretty bad shape since 2007, that’s about 19 years, before they just turned the water back on a couple days ago. It cost around $11.8 million to fix: new plumbing, cleaned the marble, safer walkways, and fresh landscaping. It’s part of a bigger push fixing up nearly 30 fountains across DC, including the big cascading one at Meridian Hill Park that had been off for about seven years. Nice to see them flowing again. Nobody’s put out an official number, but the pattern’s pretty clear with these old historic fountains. Once plumbing cracks, pipes corrode, and stonework starts falling apart after 19 years of zero maintenance, you end up paying the full $11.8 million like they just did for the Columbus fountain. If it had been kept running with regular cleaning, pump service, and minor fixes every year, you’re probably looking at maybe $20,000 to $50,000 a year tops for a fountain that size, mostly labor, electricity, and basic parts. Over 19 years that would’ve been under a million easy. The big repair bill comes from all the deferred damage piling up.
0:14

The Christopher Columbus Memorial Fountain right in front of Union Station. It had been dry and in pretty bad shape since 2007, that’s about 19 years, before they just turned the water back on a couple days ago. It cost around $11.8 million to fix: new plumbing, cleaned the marble, safer walkways, and fresh landscaping. It’s part of a bigger push fixing up nearly 30 fountains across DC, including the big cascading one at Meridian Hill Park that had been off for about seven years. Nice to see them flowing again. Nobody’s put out an official number, but the pattern’s pretty clear with these old historic fountains. Once plumbing cracks, pipes corrode, and stonework starts falling apart after 19 years of zero maintenance, you end up paying the full $11.8 million like they just did for the Columbus fountain. If it had been kept running with regular cleaning, pump service, and minor fixes every year, you’re probably looking at maybe $20,000 to $50,000 a year tops for a fountain that size, mostly labor, electricity, and basic parts. Over 19 years that would’ve been under a million easy. The big repair bill comes from all the deferred damage piling up.

Patricia 🇺🇸

152,562 次观看 • 3 个月前

The Man Who Gave Away Patagonia Doug Tompkins sold his stake in The North Face for $50,000.  He used the money to co-found Esprit. Then he sold that too, and did something almost no one does with a fortune: he disappeared. He moved to the tip of South America in 1990 with a theory most businessmen would find absurd. He believed the best thing a rich man could do was buy wilderness before someone else destroyed it, then hand it back to the country it belonged to. Together with his wife Kris, a former CEO of Patagonia clothing, they bought and conserved more than 2 million acres across Chile and Argentina. For context: that is roughly the size of Connecticut and Rhode Island combined. Most of it had been degraded farmland. Overgrazed, stripped, exhausted. The Valle Chacabuco ranch alone had been one of South America’s largest sheep operations. They bought it in 2004 for $10 million, then spent another $55 million over 20 years restoring the grasslands.  Pumas returned. Guanacos returned. The land remembered what it was. The Chileans were not immediately grateful. Many locals saw it as a land grab. An American buying millions of acres and telling them to change their way of life. Some accused him of planning to split the country in two. Others claimed he was building a nuclear waste site. He kept buying land anyway. The deal his wife finalized in his name after his death became the largest-ever private land donation to a country. Over 1 million acres handed directly to Chile, triggering government protections on another 9 million. Five new national parks. Three expanded. A conservation corridor stretching 1,250 miles. He died on December 8, 2015, in a kayaking accident on a Patagonian lake, surrounded by friends including Yvon Chouinard. He had called what he was doing “paying rent for his time on the planet.” There is a certain kind of person who builds something great and then builds something greater by walking away from it. Tompkins is the rarest version: he walked away from two fortunes, bought a wilderness, and gave it to strangers. The land is still there. The sheep are gone. If this kind of story is what you read on weekends, you might belong here. Gandalv / Gandalv
0:10

The Man Who Gave Away Patagonia Doug Tompkins sold his stake in The North Face for $50,000.  He used the money to co-found Esprit. Then he sold that too, and did something almost no one does with a fortune: he disappeared. He moved to the tip of South America in 1990 with a theory most businessmen would find absurd. He believed the best thing a rich man could do was buy wilderness before someone else destroyed it, then hand it back to the country it belonged to. Together with his wife Kris, a former CEO of Patagonia clothing, they bought and conserved more than 2 million acres across Chile and Argentina. For context: that is roughly the size of Connecticut and Rhode Island combined. Most of it had been degraded farmland. Overgrazed, stripped, exhausted. The Valle Chacabuco ranch alone had been one of South America’s largest sheep operations. They bought it in 2004 for $10 million, then spent another $55 million over 20 years restoring the grasslands.  Pumas returned. Guanacos returned. The land remembered what it was. The Chileans were not immediately grateful. Many locals saw it as a land grab. An American buying millions of acres and telling them to change their way of life. Some accused him of planning to split the country in two. Others claimed he was building a nuclear waste site. He kept buying land anyway. The deal his wife finalized in his name after his death became the largest-ever private land donation to a country. Over 1 million acres handed directly to Chile, triggering government protections on another 9 million. Five new national parks. Three expanded. A conservation corridor stretching 1,250 miles. He died on December 8, 2015, in a kayaking accident on a Patagonian lake, surrounded by friends including Yvon Chouinard. He had called what he was doing “paying rent for his time on the planet.” There is a certain kind of person who builds something great and then builds something greater by walking away from it. Tompkins is the rarest version: he walked away from two fortunes, bought a wilderness, and gave it to strangers. The land is still there. The sheep are gone. If this kind of story is what you read on weekends, you might belong here. Gandalv / Gandalv

Gandalv

147,119 次观看 • 5 个月前

For decades, the greatest church in Florence stood open to the sky. There was a hole at its centre, forty-five metres across, and nobody alive knew how to close it… They had done it on purpose. A model approved in 1367 called for a dome wider than any built since ancient Rome, and the Florentines put up the walls anyway, leaving the problem to whoever came next. The Roman method had been lost for a thousand years. Every dome since had been raised on centering, an enormous wooden scaffold built underneath to hold the masonry until it set. For a span this size, no forest in Tuscany could supply the timber. So the cathedral waited, with rain falling into it… In 1418 the city announced a competition. A goldsmith named Filippo Brunelleschi told them he would build the dome with no centering at all. The masonry would hold itself up as it rose. Many of his contemporaries decided he was a lunatic. One rival, Giovanni da Prato, wrote a public sonnet calling him a "dark, deep wellspring of ignorance" and a "miserable and imbecile beast," and rashly promised to kill himself if the plan ever worked. Brunelleschi answered with a sonnet of his own, advising him to destroy his poems, "lest they sound ridiculous when all the dancing starts, in celebration of that which he now thinks impossible." It took sixteen years. Over four million bricks, laid in a herringbone pattern so each ring locked and carried itself, in two shells, one inside the other, weighing something over twenty-five thousand tons. He designed the hoists that lifted the materials, machines Leonardo da Vinci would later sit and copy into his notebooks. It was finished in 1436. Six hundred years later it is still the largest masonry dome on earth… The director Franco Zeffirelli, a Florentine, once said what that dome does to a person who looks up at it: "When I feel depression creeping in, I return to Florence to gaze at Brunelleschi's dome. If human genius was able to achieve something so great, then I too can and must try to create, to act, to live."
0:10

For decades, the greatest church in Florence stood open to the sky. There was a hole at its centre, forty-five metres across, and nobody alive knew how to close it… They had done it on purpose. A model approved in 1367 called for a dome wider than any built since ancient Rome, and the Florentines put up the walls anyway, leaving the problem to whoever came next. The Roman method had been lost for a thousand years. Every dome since had been raised on centering, an enormous wooden scaffold built underneath to hold the masonry until it set. For a span this size, no forest in Tuscany could supply the timber. So the cathedral waited, with rain falling into it… In 1418 the city announced a competition. A goldsmith named Filippo Brunelleschi told them he would build the dome with no centering at all. The masonry would hold itself up as it rose. Many of his contemporaries decided he was a lunatic. One rival, Giovanni da Prato, wrote a public sonnet calling him a "dark, deep wellspring of ignorance" and a "miserable and imbecile beast," and rashly promised to kill himself if the plan ever worked. Brunelleschi answered with a sonnet of his own, advising him to destroy his poems, "lest they sound ridiculous when all the dancing starts, in celebration of that which he now thinks impossible." It took sixteen years. Over four million bricks, laid in a herringbone pattern so each ring locked and carried itself, in two shells, one inside the other, weighing something over twenty-five thousand tons. He designed the hoists that lifted the materials, machines Leonardo da Vinci would later sit and copy into his notebooks. It was finished in 1436. Six hundred years later it is still the largest masonry dome on earth… The director Franco Zeffirelli, a Florentine, once said what that dome does to a person who looks up at it: "When I feel depression creeping in, I return to Florence to gaze at Brunelleschi's dome. If human genius was able to achieve something so great, then I too can and must try to create, to act, to live."

James Lucas

272,650 次观看 • 1 个月前

While a downed Su-57 — shot down by Russia’s own air defence — is still burning, and the Subkhankulovo pipeline station is on fire, it’s worth explaining what those spectacular warehouse videos actually mean. Ukrainian serviceman and military analyst Serhii Misiura breaks down why Wildberries is a legitimate strategic target. Here is the scale. Wildberries turns over 4.1 trillion rubles a year — more than 2% of Russia’s entire GDP. Every 50th ruble in the Russian economy passes through one private platform. To put it in Ukrainian terms: imagine Rozetka, Prom, Nova Poshta, Monobank and all of Ukraine’s outdoor advertising combined into one company. It would still be smaller than Wildberries. — 3,000,000 m² of warehouse space — 45,000+ pickup points (Nova Poshta has 16,000 branches) — 20 million orders per day — over 7 billion items a year — 70 million active buyers per month — Net profit over 100 billion rubles The workforce behind it: — 150,000–200,000 warehouse and logistics staff — 150,000+ working at pickup points — 1,000,000+ registered sellers, employing another 2–3 million people Over 3 million people in Russia depend on this system. Now the part that makes it a military target. Wildberries doubled from 844 billion to 1.67 trillion rubles between 2021 and 2022. Then doubled again to over 4 trillion by 2024–25. Since the full-scale invasion began, the business has grown roughly five times. Western brands leaving. Sanctions. Parallel imports. “War money” — payments for the dead and wounded — flooding poor and remote Russian regions. Mass sales of dual-use goods to the front. Wildberries became the war’s single biggest beneficiary — and its key logistics and supply artery. Misiura’s conclusion: “Destroying their mega-warehouses today isn’t just a fire at a private company’s depot. It is directly burning out the economic and logistical doping that holds up the enemy’s rear.” Russia spends about 12% of GDP on this war. Wildberries is 2% of GDP on its own. That is a substantial slice of legitimate military targets. Source: Serhii Misiura, July 23, 2026 #Ukraine #UAF #DroneWarfare #KineticSanctions #RussiaUkraineWar
0:14

While a downed Su-57 — shot down by Russia’s own air defence — is still burning, and the Subkhankulovo pipeline station is on fire, it’s worth explaining what those spectacular warehouse videos actually mean. Ukrainian serviceman and military analyst Serhii Misiura breaks down why Wildberries is a legitimate strategic target. Here is the scale. Wildberries turns over 4.1 trillion rubles a year — more than 2% of Russia’s entire GDP. Every 50th ruble in the Russian economy passes through one private platform. To put it in Ukrainian terms: imagine Rozetka, Prom, Nova Poshta, Monobank and all of Ukraine’s outdoor advertising combined into one company. It would still be smaller than Wildberries. — 3,000,000 m² of warehouse space — 45,000+ pickup points (Nova Poshta has 16,000 branches) — 20 million orders per day — over 7 billion items a year — 70 million active buyers per month — Net profit over 100 billion rubles The workforce behind it: — 150,000–200,000 warehouse and logistics staff — 150,000+ working at pickup points — 1,000,000+ registered sellers, employing another 2–3 million people Over 3 million people in Russia depend on this system. Now the part that makes it a military target. Wildberries doubled from 844 billion to 1.67 trillion rubles between 2021 and 2022. Then doubled again to over 4 trillion by 2024–25. Since the full-scale invasion began, the business has grown roughly five times. Western brands leaving. Sanctions. Parallel imports. “War money” — payments for the dead and wounded — flooding poor and remote Russian regions. Mass sales of dual-use goods to the front. Wildberries became the war’s single biggest beneficiary — and its key logistics and supply artery. Misiura’s conclusion: “Destroying their mega-warehouses today isn’t just a fire at a private company’s depot. It is directly burning out the economic and logistical doping that holds up the enemy’s rear.” Russia spends about 12% of GDP on this war. Wildberries is 2% of GDP on its own. That is a substantial slice of legitimate military targets. Source: Serhii Misiura, July 23, 2026 #Ukraine #UAF #DroneWarfare #KineticSanctions #RussiaUkraineWar

Army Media 🇺🇦

51,249 次观看 • 1 个月前

I deleted all my Polymarket positions at 2am on a Tuesday because I realized I was winning 54% of my bets and still down $11,400. It took me three weeks to understand that sentence. Fifty four percent wins. Why is the balance shrinking? The math was brutal once I finally saw it. I was buying outcomes at 55 to 65 cents feeling smart because my picks kept winning. But the payout at those prices was so thin that one loss wiped out five wins. My edge was maybe 3% and the spread was eating 4%. I dug into the data hoping to find a way to trade better and instead found a number that made me want to close the app. 70% of all Polymarket addresses are in the red. And the profits? Captured by 0.04% of wallets. Four thousand addresses out of 1.7 million own almost everything. I was playing a game where 96% of participants exist to fund the other 4%. But the trades of those wallets are public. Every entry, every exit, sitting on the blockchain. I started tracking them manually. One wallet broke me. It started January 6 with $50. By the time I found it the balance was close to $500,000. Pulling $20 to $30K a day on 15 minute BTC, ETH and SOL markets, exploiting the fact that Binance updates faster than Polymarket odds. A few seconds of lag, hundreds of times a day. I scrolled its history for an hour trying to find a losing streak. Could not. That is when I stopped doing this by hand. Set up PMX. Alerts the second a tracked wallet moves, one tap copy. → Link to bot: Three weeks of shadowing instead of trading. Made back $4,200 of my $11,400 hole. Not because I got smarter. Because I stopped pretending I was the edge. The game on Polymarket is not about being right. It is about standing behind someone who already is. I am still not in profit. But for the first time in four months my balance moves the right direction and I sleep through the night. That is worth more than any win.
0:19

I deleted all my Polymarket positions at 2am on a Tuesday because I realized I was winning 54% of my bets and still down $11,400. It took me three weeks to understand that sentence. Fifty four percent wins. Why is the balance shrinking? The math was brutal once I finally saw it. I was buying outcomes at 55 to 65 cents feeling smart because my picks kept winning. But the payout at those prices was so thin that one loss wiped out five wins. My edge was maybe 3% and the spread was eating 4%. I dug into the data hoping to find a way to trade better and instead found a number that made me want to close the app. 70% of all Polymarket addresses are in the red. And the profits? Captured by 0.04% of wallets. Four thousand addresses out of 1.7 million own almost everything. I was playing a game where 96% of participants exist to fund the other 4%. But the trades of those wallets are public. Every entry, every exit, sitting on the blockchain. I started tracking them manually. One wallet broke me. It started January 6 with $50. By the time I found it the balance was close to $500,000. Pulling $20 to $30K a day on 15 minute BTC, ETH and SOL markets, exploiting the fact that Binance updates faster than Polymarket odds. A few seconds of lag, hundreds of times a day. I scrolled its history for an hour trying to find a losing streak. Could not. That is when I stopped doing this by hand. Set up PMX. Alerts the second a tracked wallet moves, one tap copy. → Link to bot: Three weeks of shadowing instead of trading. Made back $4,200 of my $11,400 hole. Not because I got smarter. Because I stopped pretending I was the edge. The game on Polymarket is not about being right. It is about standing behind someone who already is. I am still not in profit. But for the first time in four months my balance moves the right direction and I sleep through the night. That is worth more than any win.

Blaze

13,874 次观看 • 7 个月前

Yesterday at 3 AM Claude Code called me I woke up, picked up the phone, and on the screen was a message: "Wallet entered BTC Up at 11 cents. Open Polymarket?" I said yes and went back to sleep Claude Code unlocked my 2nd phone on its own, opened Polymarket, found the right market, entered the amount, and hit Buy. I could see all of it in real time through the web interface on my laptop. Screenshots from the phone updating every second. By morning the position closed in profit Let me tell you how I got here A week ago I asked Claude Code to write a script that pulls on-chain data from Polymarket and ranks wallets by win rate on 15-minute BTC markets In 20 minutes I had a table with hundreds of addresses, and 1 of them stood apart from the rest. More than 200 trades per day, surgical entry precision, and a profit curve going straight up I fed that address back into Claude Code and asked it to break down the strategy. Turns out the wallet monitors BTC volatility on Binance and Bybit every 100 milliseconds, and when it drops below 0.08% it enters Up and Down simultaneously at 25 to 35 cents A pure straddle: 1 side burns and the other flies to a dollar, giving 3 to 4x per position. Dozens of times a day I wanted to follow it but signals came at any hour, and waking up every 15 minutes for a notification was simply impossible. So I built something else Took an old Android phone and installed an agent running on the Qwen3-VL visual model. It sees what is happening on the screen and mimics human actions through ADB: taps, swipes, text input. Then I connected it to Claude Code as the executor Now the chain works like this: Claude Code monitors the wallet, sees a new position, calls me. And if I say "yes" or just do not pick up within 30 seconds, the agent on the phone opens Polymarket on its own and copies the entry Essentially I built myself an autopilot out of 2 AI systems: 1 thinks and the other presses buttons. I just sleep and occasionally pick up the phone → Here is the wallet the whole thing is tracking: For those who do not want to build a setup like this there is a Telegram bot that handles the 1st part: tracks this wallet and sends a signal on every new entry: AI calls me at 3 AM to ask permission to spend my money A year ago this would have sounded like schizophrenia. Now it is just Tuesday
0:15

Yesterday at 3 AM Claude Code called me I woke up, picked up the phone, and on the screen was a message: "Wallet entered BTC Up at 11 cents. Open Polymarket?" I said yes and went back to sleep Claude Code unlocked my 2nd phone on its own, opened Polymarket, found the right market, entered the amount, and hit Buy. I could see all of it in real time through the web interface on my laptop. Screenshots from the phone updating every second. By morning the position closed in profit Let me tell you how I got here A week ago I asked Claude Code to write a script that pulls on-chain data from Polymarket and ranks wallets by win rate on 15-minute BTC markets In 20 minutes I had a table with hundreds of addresses, and 1 of them stood apart from the rest. More than 200 trades per day, surgical entry precision, and a profit curve going straight up I fed that address back into Claude Code and asked it to break down the strategy. Turns out the wallet monitors BTC volatility on Binance and Bybit every 100 milliseconds, and when it drops below 0.08% it enters Up and Down simultaneously at 25 to 35 cents A pure straddle: 1 side burns and the other flies to a dollar, giving 3 to 4x per position. Dozens of times a day I wanted to follow it but signals came at any hour, and waking up every 15 minutes for a notification was simply impossible. So I built something else Took an old Android phone and installed an agent running on the Qwen3-VL visual model. It sees what is happening on the screen and mimics human actions through ADB: taps, swipes, text input. Then I connected it to Claude Code as the executor Now the chain works like this: Claude Code monitors the wallet, sees a new position, calls me. And if I say "yes" or just do not pick up within 30 seconds, the agent on the phone opens Polymarket on its own and copies the entry Essentially I built myself an autopilot out of 2 AI systems: 1 thinks and the other presses buttons. I just sleep and occasionally pick up the phone → Here is the wallet the whole thing is tracking: For those who do not want to build a setup like this there is a Telegram bot that handles the 1st part: tracks this wallet and sends a signal on every new entry: AI calls me at 3 AM to ask permission to spend my money A year ago this would have sounded like schizophrenia. Now it is just Tuesday

Blaze

56,524 次观看 • 6 个月前

In March 2026, a flying-wing aircraft with a wingspan exceeding 130 feet made an emergency landing at Larissa Air Base in Greece. Local media photographed it. Greek aviation enthusiasts initially identified it as a B-2 Spirit. It was not a B-2. The War Zone, SOFREP, and Military Watch Magazine identified it as the RQ-180, designated “White Bat,” the most classified unmanned surveillance platform in the American inventory. An aircraft that the United States Air Force has never officially acknowledged exists just landed in public view at a NATO base in the Eastern Mediterranean during the largest American military operation since the invasion of Iraq. The RQ-180 is what replaced the RQ-170 Sentinel, the “Beast of Kandahar” that Iran captured in December 2011 after it crashed or was brought down over eastern Iran. The RQ-170 had a wingspan of 66 feet, endurance of five to six hours, and a service ceiling of 50,000 feet. It was a tactical platform designed for short-duration ISR over Afghanistan and Pakistan. The RQ-180 is a different category entirely. Estimated wingspan: 130 to 172 feet, larger than a Boeing 737. Endurance: over 24 hours. Range: over 14,000 miles. Service ceiling: above 60,000 feet. Advanced broadband stealth across all radar frequencies. A sensor suite that remains entirely classified. The aircraft that Iran captured in 2011 was a bicycle. The aircraft that landed in Greece is a freight train. The operational implications for the Iran war are direct. The RQ-180 can loiter over Iranian territory for an entire day at altitudes beyond the reach of most air defences, collecting signals intelligence, mapping mobile missile launchers, monitoring underground facility entrances for repair activity, tracking IRGC ground force movements, conducting battle damage assessment after strikes, and feeding real-time targeting data to US and Israeli strike packages. It is the platform that enables everything else: the B-2 bombers that dropped MOPs on the IRGC headquarters, the F-35s that hit Asaluyeh, the SEAL Team 6 extraction that required precise knowledge of IRGC positions around the WSO’s hiding spot, the CIA deception campaign that needed to know which Iranian forces to misdirect and which to monitor. The RQ-180 is the eye. Everything else is the fist. Greece is the basing hub. Larissa hosts the 110th Combat Wing and has received American assets throughout the war. The emergency landing exposed the aircraft to public photography for the first time in operational context, after years of speculation and only a handful of grainy images. The aircraft that no government has confirmed just told every OSINT analyst on earth that it is real, that it is operational, and that it is flying over Iran. The last time the United States flew a stealth drone over Iran, Iran captured it, reverse-engineered elements of its design, and displayed it on state television. The RQ-180 is designed to ensure that never happens again. If it is lost over Iran, the technology compromise dwarfs 2011. The fact that the Air Force is flying it in active combat tells you the intelligence it provides is worth the risk, and the confidence in its survivability is absolute. The White Bat landed in Greece. It flies over Iran. And the war that Hegseth just called the largest strike day since February 28 is being guided by an aircraft that does not officially exist.
0:11

In March 2026, a flying-wing aircraft with a wingspan exceeding 130 feet made an emergency landing at Larissa Air Base in Greece. Local media photographed it. Greek aviation enthusiasts initially identified it as a B-2 Spirit. It was not a B-2. The War Zone, SOFREP, and Military Watch Magazine identified it as the RQ-180, designated “White Bat,” the most classified unmanned surveillance platform in the American inventory. An aircraft that the United States Air Force has never officially acknowledged exists just landed in public view at a NATO base in the Eastern Mediterranean during the largest American military operation since the invasion of Iraq. The RQ-180 is what replaced the RQ-170 Sentinel, the “Beast of Kandahar” that Iran captured in December 2011 after it crashed or was brought down over eastern Iran. The RQ-170 had a wingspan of 66 feet, endurance of five to six hours, and a service ceiling of 50,000 feet. It was a tactical platform designed for short-duration ISR over Afghanistan and Pakistan. The RQ-180 is a different category entirely. Estimated wingspan: 130 to 172 feet, larger than a Boeing 737. Endurance: over 24 hours. Range: over 14,000 miles. Service ceiling: above 60,000 feet. Advanced broadband stealth across all radar frequencies. A sensor suite that remains entirely classified. The aircraft that Iran captured in 2011 was a bicycle. The aircraft that landed in Greece is a freight train. The operational implications for the Iran war are direct. The RQ-180 can loiter over Iranian territory for an entire day at altitudes beyond the reach of most air defences, collecting signals intelligence, mapping mobile missile launchers, monitoring underground facility entrances for repair activity, tracking IRGC ground force movements, conducting battle damage assessment after strikes, and feeding real-time targeting data to US and Israeli strike packages. It is the platform that enables everything else: the B-2 bombers that dropped MOPs on the IRGC headquarters, the F-35s that hit Asaluyeh, the SEAL Team 6 extraction that required precise knowledge of IRGC positions around the WSO’s hiding spot, the CIA deception campaign that needed to know which Iranian forces to misdirect and which to monitor. The RQ-180 is the eye. Everything else is the fist. Greece is the basing hub. Larissa hosts the 110th Combat Wing and has received American assets throughout the war. The emergency landing exposed the aircraft to public photography for the first time in operational context, after years of speculation and only a handful of grainy images. The aircraft that no government has confirmed just told every OSINT analyst on earth that it is real, that it is operational, and that it is flying over Iran. The last time the United States flew a stealth drone over Iran, Iran captured it, reverse-engineered elements of its design, and displayed it on state television. The RQ-180 is designed to ensure that never happens again. If it is lost over Iran, the technology compromise dwarfs 2011. The fact that the Air Force is flying it in active combat tells you the intelligence it provides is worth the risk, and the confidence in its survivability is absolute. The White Bat landed in Greece. It flies over Iran. And the war that Hegseth just called the largest strike day since February 28 is being guided by an aircraft that does not officially exist.

Shanaka Anslem Perera ⚡

130,963 次观看 • 5 个月前

$25K+ profit daily from 1 wallet, with OpenClaw. I have the exact step-by-step guide, giving it free for 24 hours. To get it: 1. Comment "OpenClaw" 2. Like and Retweet. 3. Follow me Himanshu Kumar ( So, i can send you DM) I ran a simple script last night with Claude Code. Pull on-chain data from Polymarket, sort by win rate on 15 minute BTC markets. 20 minutes later, 100s of wallets showed up. Most were losing money or barely breaking even. Then I spotted 1 address. 200+ trades daily, every single week profitable, timing so precise it looked robotic. Because it is. I fed the wallet address back into Claude Code. Asked it to reverse engineer the strategy. 20 mins later the full breakdown appeared on my screen. Here is how it works: Bot monitors Binance and Bybit every 100ms. Waiting for BTC volatility compression to drop below 0.08%. When it hits that level, it buys both Up and Down contracts at 25 to 35 cents each. Classic straddle play. 1 contract loses, the other rockets to a dollar. Entry at 30 cents means 3x to 4x return every time. Repeats dozens of times per day. Result: $13K to $25K profit daily from 1 wallet. No human intuition, no insider tips. Just an algorithm exploiting a gap in market mechanics. I searched to see if anyone else found this wallet. Turns out yes. There is a Telegram bot that auto-copies trades from wallets like this. I connected it to the same address. Every entry matched what my terminal showed. You can now copy-trade an algorithm in real time. That capability did not exist 12 months ago. Comment "OpenClaw" and I will send you everything. Must Follow me Himanshu Kumar to get the DM.
0:16

$25K+ profit daily from 1 wallet, with OpenClaw. I have the exact step-by-step guide, giving it free for 24 hours. To get it: 1. Comment "OpenClaw" 2. Like and Retweet. 3. Follow me Himanshu Kumar ( So, i can send you DM) I ran a simple script last night with Claude Code. Pull on-chain data from Polymarket, sort by win rate on 15 minute BTC markets. 20 minutes later, 100s of wallets showed up. Most were losing money or barely breaking even. Then I spotted 1 address. 200+ trades daily, every single week profitable, timing so precise it looked robotic. Because it is. I fed the wallet address back into Claude Code. Asked it to reverse engineer the strategy. 20 mins later the full breakdown appeared on my screen. Here is how it works: Bot monitors Binance and Bybit every 100ms. Waiting for BTC volatility compression to drop below 0.08%. When it hits that level, it buys both Up and Down contracts at 25 to 35 cents each. Classic straddle play. 1 contract loses, the other rockets to a dollar. Entry at 30 cents means 3x to 4x return every time. Repeats dozens of times per day. Result: $13K to $25K profit daily from 1 wallet. No human intuition, no insider tips. Just an algorithm exploiting a gap in market mechanics. I searched to see if anyone else found this wallet. Turns out yes. There is a Telegram bot that auto-copies trades from wallets like this. I connected it to the same address. Every entry matched what my terminal showed. You can now copy-trade an algorithm in real time. That capability did not exist 12 months ago. Comment "OpenClaw" and I will send you everything. Must Follow me Himanshu Kumar to get the DM.

Himanshu Kumar

13,218 次观看 • 6 个月前

Being a crypto bro in my home Australia means 25% corporate tax for qualifying companies, and up to 47% on the rest when I cash out. Make a million dollars profit after taking all the risk? • Company pays $250k corp tax → $750k left. • Distribute (franked or unfranked) at the top rate and you walk away with roughly $530k net. Let’s say I buy a $250k company car: I can only claim depreciation (business portion), and if I lease it over 12 months without a proper logbook, I get hit with Fringe Benefits Tax. I get fucked in several ways, left right and centre. Meanwhile, I stay in Thailand, paper-move my crypto, and that million is all mine thanks to 0% on crypto capital gains for 5 years via licensed platforms. Then my money comes back tax-free and snaps up fire-sale bargains as a result of the government’s stupidity, at the cost of everyday Australians. The thing is, I’m not an isolated event. Capital will flee Australia, and the government will try to squeeze more blood from the stone.”
0:12

Being a crypto bro in my home Australia means 25% corporate tax for qualifying companies, and up to 47% on the rest when I cash out. Make a million dollars profit after taking all the risk? • Company pays $250k corp tax → $750k left. • Distribute (franked or unfranked) at the top rate and you walk away with roughly $530k net. Let’s say I buy a $250k company car: I can only claim depreciation (business portion), and if I lease it over 12 months without a proper logbook, I get hit with Fringe Benefits Tax. I get fucked in several ways, left right and centre. Meanwhile, I stay in Thailand, paper-move my crypto, and that million is all mine thanks to 0% on crypto capital gains for 5 years via licensed platforms. Then my money comes back tax-free and snaps up fire-sale bargains as a result of the government’s stupidity, at the cost of everyday Australians. The thing is, I’m not an isolated event. Capital will flee Australia, and the government will try to squeeze more blood from the stone.”

FUBAR

75,593 次观看 • 3 个月前

InterLink’s Early Vision for NIST-Standardised Post-Quantum Cryptography 🔐✨ The next five years may bring a much clearer answer to a question that has long been difficult to judge: Is a digital asset truly secure? 🤔 For InterLink, the answer may increasingly depend on one critical factor: whether it is quantum-resistant and aligned with NIST standards 🧬🔒 Why this matters now ⚠️ Two fast-moving technologies are reshaping digital security: • AI is improving the ability to discover weaknesses in systems 🤖 • Quantum computing is advancing towards the point where today’s cryptographic foundations could become vulnerable ⚛️ For InterLink, this is not just a theoretical discussion. It is a reminder that blockchain networks, wallets, and custody systems must prepare now for the post-quantum era ⏳🛡️ Why NIST is central to InterLink’s approach 📘🏛️ Many in the InterLink community already know NIST. NIST, part of the U.S. Department of Commerce, plays a major role in defining and evaluating security standards, including those for post-quantum cryptography. Its work matters because it helps shape what “secure” will mean in a quantum-capable future 📊🔍 In practical terms, InterLink’s long-term security vision is closely tied to whether its cryptographic design can withstand post-quantum threats 🚀 The risk for blockchain networks and digital assets 🔎💥 Recent research and experiments from major organisations, including Google, have highlighted a growing concern: what was once considered extremely difficult, using quantum computing to threaten cryptographic systems, is no longer something that can be ignored 🧪⚠️ That does not mean current systems are broken today. It does mean that networks which fail to prepare for post-quantum threats could face serious risks later 📉 For InterLink, this is exactly why early research matters 🧠✨ If sufficiently powerful quantum computers become available, some current cryptographic methods may become vulnerable. For any network storing value, identity, NFTs, or permissions, that is a major issue 💳🖼️🧾 InterLink’s early work on post-quantum readiness 🧠🔐 InterLink Foundation has already been researching: ✅ digital signatures ✍️ ✅ cryptographic algorithms 🔣 ✅ migration mechanisms for future security upgrades 🔄 One of the most notable areas of work is the ability to generate new private keys from an existing seed phrase 🌱➡️🔑 This matters because it offers a pathway to improve security without forcing users to abandon access to their assets 🙌 Address Alias: preserving continuity during migration 🪪🔗 Another important InterLink mechanism is Address Alias. This is designed to let users: ✓ retain their existing wallet addresses 🧾 ✓ preserve associated tokens and NFTs 🖼️💰 ✓ migrate to a new cryptographic security architecture 🔐➡️🛠️ That is a practical and user-friendly design choice. Security upgrades are often hard to adopt when they break continuity. InterLink’s approach aims to solve that problem 🌉 Bringing post-quantum protection into smart contracts 🛡️📜 InterLink is also implementing SLH-DSA-SHA2-128s (FIPS 205) within IRC smart contracts. This adds another layer of protection for: • vaults 🏦 • high-value assets 💎 • long-term storage 📦 • sensitive on-chain operations ⚙️ The goal is not only to protect wallets, but also to strengthen the systems that govern custody and transaction security across the network 🧱🔒 Testing on the Taj Mahal Testnet 🧪🛰️ These experiments are currently being conducted on the InterLink Taj Mahal Testnet. According to InterLink, the experimental implementations have passed the NIST-based simulation tests carried out so far ✅📈 That is an encouraging early signal, although broader testing and real-world validation will remain important as development continues 🔍 Looking ahead to 2027 🚀🌍 InterLink’s stated goal is to fully integrate this architecture into the Open Mainnet in 2027. If achieved, that would bring InterLink closer to a future where security is defined not only by current best practice, but by resilience against quantum-era threats 🛡️⚛️ The bigger takeaway 🌍✨ The key lesson is simple: In the quantum era, security will not only mean protecting your private will mean asking whether the cryptography behind that key was built to survive the next generation of computing 🔐⏭️ For InterLink, this is a strategic direction with long-term significance 📌 Final thought 💡 Post-quantum readiness is no longer just a technical topic for specialists. For InterLink, it is becoming part of the broader conversation about long-term digital asset security 🧠🔒 NIST-aligned cryptography, practical migration paths, and user-preserving design may soon define the networks people trust most 🌟 InterLink Labs 👤 + 🌐 KV Reina | InterLink Labs InterLink Foundation #InterLink #ITLG #ITL #WeAreTheFirst10MLinkers Join me on InterLink 😁 Start mining now and use my invitation link: 💰 My code is: 111222777888 💰 Please DM me once you have used my code. 👍
0:11

InterLink’s Early Vision for NIST-Standardised Post-Quantum Cryptography 🔐✨ The next five years may bring a much clearer answer to a question that has long been difficult to judge: Is a digital asset truly secure? 🤔 For InterLink, the answer may increasingly depend on one critical factor: whether it is quantum-resistant and aligned with NIST standards 🧬🔒 Why this matters now ⚠️ Two fast-moving technologies are reshaping digital security: • AI is improving the ability to discover weaknesses in systems 🤖 • Quantum computing is advancing towards the point where today’s cryptographic foundations could become vulnerable ⚛️ For InterLink, this is not just a theoretical discussion. It is a reminder that blockchain networks, wallets, and custody systems must prepare now for the post-quantum era ⏳🛡️ Why NIST is central to InterLink’s approach 📘🏛️ Many in the InterLink community already know NIST. NIST, part of the U.S. Department of Commerce, plays a major role in defining and evaluating security standards, including those for post-quantum cryptography. Its work matters because it helps shape what “secure” will mean in a quantum-capable future 📊🔍 In practical terms, InterLink’s long-term security vision is closely tied to whether its cryptographic design can withstand post-quantum threats 🚀 The risk for blockchain networks and digital assets 🔎💥 Recent research and experiments from major organisations, including Google, have highlighted a growing concern: what was once considered extremely difficult, using quantum computing to threaten cryptographic systems, is no longer something that can be ignored 🧪⚠️ That does not mean current systems are broken today. It does mean that networks which fail to prepare for post-quantum threats could face serious risks later 📉 For InterLink, this is exactly why early research matters 🧠✨ If sufficiently powerful quantum computers become available, some current cryptographic methods may become vulnerable. For any network storing value, identity, NFTs, or permissions, that is a major issue 💳🖼️🧾 InterLink’s early work on post-quantum readiness 🧠🔐 InterLink Foundation has already been researching: ✅ digital signatures ✍️ ✅ cryptographic algorithms 🔣 ✅ migration mechanisms for future security upgrades 🔄 One of the most notable areas of work is the ability to generate new private keys from an existing seed phrase 🌱➡️🔑 This matters because it offers a pathway to improve security without forcing users to abandon access to their assets 🙌 Address Alias: preserving continuity during migration 🪪🔗 Another important InterLink mechanism is Address Alias. This is designed to let users: ✓ retain their existing wallet addresses 🧾 ✓ preserve associated tokens and NFTs 🖼️💰 ✓ migrate to a new cryptographic security architecture 🔐➡️🛠️ That is a practical and user-friendly design choice. Security upgrades are often hard to adopt when they break continuity. InterLink’s approach aims to solve that problem 🌉 Bringing post-quantum protection into smart contracts 🛡️📜 InterLink is also implementing SLH-DSA-SHA2-128s (FIPS 205) within IRC smart contracts. This adds another layer of protection for: • vaults 🏦 • high-value assets 💎 • long-term storage 📦 • sensitive on-chain operations ⚙️ The goal is not only to protect wallets, but also to strengthen the systems that govern custody and transaction security across the network 🧱🔒 Testing on the Taj Mahal Testnet 🧪🛰️ These experiments are currently being conducted on the InterLink Taj Mahal Testnet. According to InterLink, the experimental implementations have passed the NIST-based simulation tests carried out so far ✅📈 That is an encouraging early signal, although broader testing and real-world validation will remain important as development continues 🔍 Looking ahead to 2027 🚀🌍 InterLink’s stated goal is to fully integrate this architecture into the Open Mainnet in 2027. If achieved, that would bring InterLink closer to a future where security is defined not only by current best practice, but by resilience against quantum-era threats 🛡️⚛️ The bigger takeaway 🌍✨ The key lesson is simple: In the quantum era, security will not only mean protecting your private will mean asking whether the cryptography behind that key was built to survive the next generation of computing 🔐⏭️ For InterLink, this is a strategic direction with long-term significance 📌 Final thought 💡 Post-quantum readiness is no longer just a technical topic for specialists. For InterLink, it is becoming part of the broader conversation about long-term digital asset security 🧠🔒 NIST-aligned cryptography, practical migration paths, and user-preserving design may soon define the networks people trust most 🌟 InterLink Labs 👤 + 🌐 KV Reina | InterLink Labs InterLink Foundation #InterLink #ITLG #ITL #WeAreTheFirst10MLinkers Join me on InterLink 😁 Start mining now and use my invitation link: 💰 My code is: 111222777888 💰 Please DM me once you have used my code. 👍

Tekkaus® | InterLink • MOD • T2 Community Builder

22,550 次观看 • 1 个月前

this is f*cking gold engineers at Meta just deleted the most expensive part of multi-agent systems: instead of training a communication topology, they compile a fresh one for every query 20 agents went from 7 hours to 6 minutes. the problem everyone hits: 5 agents works. 20 agents turns into a group chat that answers slower than one model and costs more than the task is worth. ReActNet's fix is that the graph is written per query, not learned once: > an LLM controller reads the query and the agent roster > it compiles a sequence of directed graphs, one per reasoning stage > every edge carries a written instruction, e.g. "list boundary cases for this behavior" > each agent updates its state from its own previous state plus assigned neighbors > a final node aggregates all five states into the answer > no RL, no gradients, no training stage at all what that buys on gpt-4o: 92.75 average across 6 benchmarks, best on 5 of them. 100.00 on MultiArith. 92.74 pass@1 on HumanEval, +21 over a single model. and the number that should worry anyone running a swarm: at 20 agents GPTSwarm needs 412 minutes and $41.42. ReActNet needs 6.22 minutes and $6.53 and scores higher. the honest catch: more agents did not make it smarter. 5 agents scored 79.74, 20 scored 77.77. the topology was never the thing to learn.
0:18

this is f*cking gold engineers at Meta just deleted the most expensive part of multi-agent systems: instead of training a communication topology, they compile a fresh one for every query 20 agents went from 7 hours to 6 minutes. the problem everyone hits: 5 agents works. 20 agents turns into a group chat that answers slower than one model and costs more than the task is worth. ReActNet's fix is that the graph is written per query, not learned once: > an LLM controller reads the query and the agent roster > it compiles a sequence of directed graphs, one per reasoning stage > every edge carries a written instruction, e.g. "list boundary cases for this behavior" > each agent updates its state from its own previous state plus assigned neighbors > a final node aggregates all five states into the answer > no RL, no gradients, no training stage at all what that buys on gpt-4o: 92.75 average across 6 benchmarks, best on 5 of them. 100.00 on MultiArith. 92.74 pass@1 on HumanEval, +21 over a single model. and the number that should worry anyone running a swarm: at 20 agents GPTSwarm needs 412 minutes and $41.42. ReActNet needs 6.22 minutes and $6.53 and scores higher. the honest catch: more agents did not make it smarter. 5 agents scored 79.74, 20 scored 77.77. the topology was never the thing to learn.

NO1ennn

26,237 次观看 • 4 天前