Creator & Artist 🎨 Turning ideas into art & stories Exploring Web3 • AI • Onchain Building my own little universe

visiting the department of fomo. no case yet. must be escorted at all times. @FomiesNFT
2
35
Let me know how your trade went this week. Otherwise, better join TRA ASAP.
15
18
37
4,652
Amir retweeted
Looks like we're trending (again) today, @tether! nitter.net/i/trending/21031327845…
128
124
309
10,204
Amir retweeted
USDT is coming home to Bitcoin, more private than ever. Dollars and sats, finally reunited.
USDT on Bitcoin. It's coming home
111
114
311
18,051
Amir retweeted
The world is waking up to the power of RGB on Bitcoin ☀️
Most "Bitcoin smart contract" solutions force bad compromises: ❌ Federated multisig honeypots ❌ Expiring virtual UTXOs ❌ Mempool bloat & altcoin gas tokens We took a different path with BitTasker. 🛠️ By leveraging RGB client-side validation & Taproot UTXOs as cryptographic single-use seals: The state machine executes 100% locally inside the app on your own hardware • Zero data bloat on the Bitcoin blockchain • Absolute self-sovereign spend authority Smart, programmable escrow secured by pure native Bitcoin. Run it straight from your phone or laptop like any native app. No bridges. No federations. Includes #USDT on @lightning Full release dropping soon. 🟧 @Bitcoinbeach @utexocom @RGB_Hub @RGBAssociation @whbitcoin @paoloardoino @giacomozucco @mir_btc @bitcoinofficesv @VIhnatiuk @Namaskaram_Luca @birk1907 @Kurcide @mikegermano @michelleweekley @romanmartinezc
93
90
189
5,548
The next bottleneck in humanoid robotics will not be building the robot. It will be teaching it enough real-world behavior to become useful. A robot can be manufactured at scale, but reliable autonomy still comes from thousands of interactions with messy physical environments. Different objects Different tasks Different edge cases Different failures Simulation can cover part of this. But the physical world keeps producing situations that a simulator cannot fully anticipate. That is why teleoperation matters. Every human-guided action can become a training trace: what the robot saw, what it attempted, what happened, and how the task was completed. The real challenge is turning those traces into a scalable data pipeline. This is where @PrismaXai is interesting. Instead of treating robot data collection as an internal operation, it approaches it as shared infrastructure: operators → real interactions → validated traces → evaluation → training data If humanoids are heading toward millions of real-world tasks, the scarce resource may not be robot hardware. It may be the volume of high-quality physical experience available to train them. The robotics race is becoming a data race.
1
4
30
Order execution comes down to one constraint: you cannot maximize price control and fill certainty at the same time. A limit order sets the maximum price you will accept, but the market decides whether you get filled. A market order flips that priority. You get immediate execution against available liquidity, with a 5% slippage tolerance protecting the order from moving too far through a thin book. Post-Only adds another constraint: the order must provide liquidity. If it would match immediately, it gets cancelled. You keep maker-fee treatment, but sacrifice fill certainty. Reduce-Only solves a different problem. If your position is +10 BTC and 4 BTC is closed elsewhere before your 10 BTC sell order executes, a Reduce-Only order can only close the remaining 6 BTC. It cannot turn the leftover quantity into a short. Then execution duration changes the behavior: GTC leaves unfilled quantity resting. IOC takes whatever can execute now and cancels the remainder. For larger positions, TWAP distributes execution across time, while scaled orders distribute it across price levels. So the practical question is not: Which order type should I use? It is: Which constraint matters most for this trade? Price Fill speed Fees Position direction Time Market impact @TxFlow_L1
1
4
41
The next generation of perp trading will not be defined by leverage. It will be defined by execution. Fast order matching. Onchain settlement. Verifiable trade records. Zero-gas trading actions. That is the interesting part of @Antarctic_Ex . The goal is not to make a DEX feel more decentralized. It is to make decentralized trading feel professional. Made better. Trade better. 🧊
3
24
Amir retweeted
This is content from Justin Drake’s remarks on quantum computing progress from almost four months ago. The 1,096,361 problem is approaching silently, it is not a distant-future problem, but a practical one.
Today a crazy quantum story just got wilder. On March 31, the Google Quantum AI team published a landmark result on Shor's algorithm for elliptic curve cryptography. Technically, the paper was a bombshell: a dramatic 10x improvement over the state-of-the-art. As a stunt and wakeup call to the blockchain space, those optimisations were illustrated on secp256k1, the elliptic curve underlying Bitcoin and Ethereum signatures. But perhaps the most striking part of the paper was sociological, not technical. Instead of following standard academic process, the optimisations were kept secret, hidden behind a zero-knowledge (ZK) proof. Google's accompanying blog post mentions they "engaged with the U.S. government". The ZK proof demonstrates the existence of algorithmic improvements without leaking details. Academic censorship with ZK, a historic first! As a co-author of the Google paper I witnessed some of the context surrounding this censorship. To be honest, multiple aspects of that context don't sit well with me. As much as I believe the general public ought to know more, I am limited in my ability to whistleblow. Though let me be clear about one thing: the Google team's professionalism has been absolutely exemplary, and they deserve nothing but praise. Censorship has a way of backfiring. The Streisand effect, where an attempt to bury something only draws more attention to it, is exactly what's unfolding today. First, Google's key optimisation has been rediscovered by the French. And in a thrilling turn of events, a collaborative Shor-at-home challenge just launched. The initiative, available at ecdsa[.]fail, breached a new Shor world record in a matter of hours. Let's start with the rediscovery. Just two months after Google's paper, French quantum expert André Schrottenloher cracks the main secret optimisation. His paper, titled "Optimized Point Addition Circuits for Elliptic Curve Discrete Logarithms", landed on the arXiv today. Big congrats to André, who beat several other nerdsnipped experts to it. In a blog post also published today, Craig Gidney, the world expert on Shor optimisations, revealed that he'd been sitting on this very optimisation for a whole year under censorship pressure. Interestingly, André missed a handful of minor optimisations, both from Google's original publication and from improvements found since. It's plausible there's still plenty of juice left to squeeze out of Shor, and this is exactly what the ecdsa[.]fail challenge is about. The verifier program developed for the ZK proof does double duty, automatically filtering for valid submissions. Dozens of compounding small and micro improvements are rolling in. As of the time of writing there's an 8.4% improvement to Google's circuit, as measured by the product of logical qubit count and Toffoli gate count. Nice! The nerdsnipping ran deeper than anyone expected. Over the last few weeks it became clear it extended well beyond André and other quantum experts. Behind the scenes, a small army of amateurs quietly got to work. Inspired by Karpathy-style autoresearch, they turned AI on Shor. Ironically, the verifier program for the ZK proof makes an ideal reward function for AIs. The barrier to entry for this modern style of research is refreshingly low, with several non-experts, even a teenager, finding nice optimisations. Get in touch if you'd like to join a Telegram group with fellow autoresearchers :) Part 2: neutral atoms and qday The story doesn't end with Google. On the same day Google went public, a stealthy startup called Oratomic published its own Shor paper in a coordinated release. It made a splash, ultimately becoming the most upvoted paper on scirate[.]com, a website ranking arXiv papers. Oratomic's claim was wild. By building on Google's logical optimisations and applying custom physical optimisations for neutral atoms, they claimed just 10K physical qubits were sufficient to run Shor's algorithm on secp256k1. That number is mind-bogglingly low. Knowing essentially nothing about neutral atoms when Oratomic's paper landed, I was intrigued and decided to learn more about the tech. I fell straight down the rabbit hole and spent a couple hundred hours on the topic. I got a little obsessed and watched every YouTube video I could find and spoke to a bunch of experts. My conclusion? The tech is real, very real. Even Google recently decided to start a neutral atom lab, a notable pivot from their sole focus on superconducting qubits. If you care about qday, i.e. the day a quantum computer will break the first piece of cryptography in production, neutral atoms demand your attention. I shared some of my learnings on Shor and neutral atoms in a 30min talk at the ZKProof cryptography conference. You can find it on YouTube by searching "zkproof neutral atom". Here's an interesting observation about this duo of breakthrough papers: neither Google nor Oratomic say a word about what their results mean for qday. No timelines. Zero. Nada. That is especially baffling given that the whole point of whitehat quantum cryptanalysis is to inform qday estimations and help the general public make good decisions. So let me attempt to partially fill the silence, similarly to what Scott Aaronson did in his April 29 post. Given everything I know, including scary non-public information, I now put the odds of qday by 2032 at 50%. 10% by 2030. Anecdotally, the US government has its own date: 2035. Originating at the NSA and later adopted by NIST, it's when branches of the US government will be disallowed from using quantum-vulnerable cryptography. In plain language: with hindsight, that date is a joke and should be discounted entirely. I don't see how NIST avoids being forced to pull it forward by years. Part 3: post-quantum cryptography There are good reasons to sound the alarm today, but please do not panic. Rushing carelessly towards immature post-quantum cryptography is a recipe for disaster. IMO a good target date for migration is 2029, roughly 3.5 years out. 2029 happens to be the date selected by Google, Cloudflare, and the Ethereum Foundation. These days most of my time goes to safely migrating Ethereum towards post-quantum cryptography as part of the broader lean Ethereum effort. There's a lot to do. We need to rip out and replace BLS signatures at the consensus layer, KZG commitments at the data layer, and ECDSA signatures at the execution layer. The plan to get there is compelling, and is based on hash-based cryptography. Within the Ethereum Foundation we've developed a Swiss army knife called leanVM (github[.]com/leanEthereum/leanVM) powered by the magic of hash-based SNARKs. Thanks to truly exceptional work by Emile, Thomas, and others, its performance is derisked. Regarding security, leanVM is a jewel, a minimal zkVM crafted for end-to-end formal verification and maximum security. Want to help? There are two $1M initiatives. First, the Proximity Prize (proximityprize[.]org). Solve a long-standing mathematical conjecture in coding theory, improve hash-based SNARKs, and go home a millionaire. Second, the Poseidon Initiative (poseidon-initiative[.]info), offers $1M for breaking Poseidon, the SNARK-friendly hash function.
4,537
6,395
7,776
132,979
Most trading mistakes happen before the trade is even opened. You see a setup. You get excited. Then you start looking for reasons to enter. I prefer the opposite approach with @get_truenorth . I use it to attack the trade before I take it: → Find the setup → Build the core thesis → Define entry and invalidation → Map liquidation zones and squeeze risks → Measure the risk/reward → Then ask the uncomfortable question: What am I missing? That changes the role of AI completely. I do not need another bot telling me what to buy. I need something that can challenge my bias, expose weak assumptions and force me to reconsider the trade before capital is at risk. If the thesis survives the argument, I make the final call. That is how I see TrueNorth: Not a signal generator. A second voice at the trading desk whose job is to disagree with me.
1
1
4
40
Friendly remind: AX September Futures closes on Sep 30. You didn't miss it. Registration is still open. up to $15,000 on the line.
Do you remember The 21st night of September The new event: antarctic.exchange/activity/…
18
20
45
5,521
A robot can perceive its environment, plan the next move, and execute it autonomously. But there is a missing layer: Should it be allowed to? That creates a deeper stack: Perception → Planning → Action → Feedback and underneath it: Identity → Permissions → Authorization Autonomy answers what a machine can do. Trust infrastructure answers what it is authorized to do. That distinction becomes critical as machines move from executing commands to acting independently. That is the infrastructure space @continuumlabs_ is exploring.
4
55
Crypto made 24/7 markets feel normal. Traditional markets still operate around a clock. That difference is where @arcus_xyz gets interesting. But I do not think the main story is simply stocks trading 24/7. The bigger shift is what happens when financial exposure starts becoming an onchain primitive. Arcus is already moving in that direction. → Isolated positions give traders separate risk boundaries → pTokens turn managed perpetual exposure into transferable ERC-20 assets → Stock Tokens bring traditional market exposure into the same onchain environment That creates a different flow: Position → Token → DeFi primitive And that is where things get interesting. A leveraged position does not have to remain trapped inside an exchange account. It can become something transferable and potentially composable across onchain markets. That changes the question from: Can we put traditional assets onchain? to: “What can we build once those assets actually behave like onchain primitives?” Arcus has already crossed $2B in reported trading volume while still in beta, but the number I am watching most closely is not volume. It is the architecture being built underneath it. 24/7 markets are the starting point. Composable financial positions could be the bigger story. Still early. But this is the part of Arcus I am watching.
6
49
Amir retweeted
private money for an open world
104
90
219
6,173
Amir retweeted
Privacy isn’t just a season ☀️ But it definitely is privacy szn.
110
91
230
8,343
Most financial infrastructure is built around moving claims. Settlement is what makes those claims final That’s why blockchains become interesting when they can reduce the distance between ownership, transfer and settlement The technology matters less than where it removes friction from the existing system
67
63
104
1,838
Amir retweeted
new USDT on Bitcoin launch partner dropping soon eyes wide open
148
116
305
12,582