.@veritaseum is coming, and ut is no joke. She builds and improves herself. She commands avery top model. She ud the greater GOAT. I will be soon offering limited (beta testing) subscription opportunities to #Smartmetal owners. Get your #smartmetal here quantum-metals.co.nz/shop/ra…

From the @dao_veri community and in particular @SovereignRiz . Thank you, m friends...

The group behind such hits as: “We’re All Going To Die” and “Regulate Me Now” are building a wet lab in SF. I do not recommend this.

Alibaba's Quinn has released open source self-driving software. AI is eating the world, even the AI world! share.google/qxDt5WHE6ZaJU6J…

I am curious to see how much of thst research covers me and my work.

This is what a foundational patent looks like. The ’566 patent family is now cited by 158 patent families. And look at who shows up: Wells Fargo — 10 Ripple — 6 Bank of America — 1 But the first-generation citations are only the beginning. Those 17 Wells Fargo, Ripple and Bank of America patent families generated 334 secondary citation relationships downstream. Then it keeps going. Follow the chain far enough and you get: ’566 → Ripple → Bank of America → JPMorgan JPMorgan shows up another generation downstream with 12 patent families in the citation network we traced. Think about what that means. A patent with priority going back to May 9, 2014 sits upstream of patent portfolios built by some of the largest financial institutions in the world. And this is only three companies. The broader ’566 citation network includes names such as NASDAQ, Mastercard, IBM (purchased by Circle USDC), Coinbase and many more. Patents don't prove that every later product infringes. But citations leave receipts. And these receipts form one hell of a trail. Question everything.

BREAKING: THE UK IS NOT JUST REGULATING STABLECOINS. It wants the Bank of England to help them innovate. The British government announced plans to give the Bank of England a new secondary objective: Support innovation in payments and digital money. Financial stability remains the Bank’s primary responsibility. But the Bank would also be required to report to Parliament every year on how it is advancing payments innovation. Why the sudden urgency? Because Britain is falling behind. The global stablecoin market is already worth approximately $310–$320 billion. More than 99% is denominated in U.S. dollars. The only UK-issued sterling stablecoin identified by Parliament had a market capitalization of just $1.53 million as of March 11, 2026. The Bank of England has already started changing course. Proposed individual and business holding limits? Scrapped. They were replaced with a temporary issuance guardrail of up to: £40 BILLION PER SYSTEMIC STABLECOIN. And the Bank says individuals and businesses will face no stablecoin-specific limits on the size, frequency or type of transaction. But here is the part almost everyone is missing. The UK is not merely preparing for digital coins. Its own policy documents now describe: - Programmable finance. - Tokenized payments. - Improved settlement. - Agentic payments where AI acts for consumers and businesses. A stablecoin is only the value being transferred. The deeper technology determines how that value is: - Committed. - Conditioned. - Disbursed. - Settled. - Or refunded if the conditions fail. And Veritaseum holds a granted European patent covering a defined architecture for doing exactly that. EP4148642B1 Devices, systems, and methods for facilitating low trust and zero trust value transfers. Priority date: May 9, 2014 European grant published: December 24, 2025 Assignee: Veritaseum Inc. The granted claims describe a system where: - A facilitator receives transaction terms between two parties. - Digital value is committed through a transfer mechanism. - External data can determine the disbursement. - The completed transaction is signed and broadcast for settlement. - A dependent claim expressly covers a decentralized digital currency but also hybrd models. - Other claims provide expiration and refund pathways when the agreed conditions are not completed. That is not a patent on the word “stablecoin.” It is a granted European patent on low- and zero-trust programmable value-transfer machinery that can underpin stablecoin-based transactions. Look at the timeline. 2014: Veritaseum files the foundational patent architecture. 2025: The European patent is granted. 2026: The UK begins rewriting the Bank of England’s mandate around digital-money innovation, programmable payments and stablecoin settlement. The UK is treating this like the future. Veritaseum was patenting the transaction rails more than a decade ago. So the real question is: As banks, stablecoin issuers and autonomous agents begin building on these new rails… Who owns the foundational intellectual property beneath them? The stablecoin carries the value. The patented architecture may govern how that value moves. Question everything.

COINBASE JUST ANNOUNCED: “THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM FOR AI.” THE PATENT RECEIPTS START 12 YEARS EARLIER. Coinbase says AI agents are becoming active participants in the economy. They will: - Pay. - Get paid. - Hold value. - Monitor markets. - Purchase information. - Manage portfolios. And execute transactions through financial infrastructure that is always on, global and programmable. Coinbase calls it: AiFi. Its own description is remarkably clear: - A person or business defines the objective. - Sets the permissions. - Establishes the limits. - The agent monitors the conditions. And the software acts when those conditions are met. Coinbase says: “People and businesses set the rules… Software acts within them.” Sounds new? Look at the timeline. May 9, 2014 The Veritaseum ’566 patent family claims priority for low- and zero-trust value-transfer systems involving: - Automated clients. - Transaction terms. - External data. - Cryptographic signatures. - Conditional execution. - Incomplete transaction records. - Completed transaction records. - And blockchain/hybrid settlement. July 3, 2022 Veritaseum’s patent counsel sent written notice directly to Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong. The letter identified: US11196566 and JP6813477 It specifically named Coinbase products including: - Exchange. - Wallet. - USD Coin. - Commerce. - Prime. - Prime API. And invited Coinbase to discuss licensing. September 22, 2022 Veritaseum sued Coinbase seeking at least: $350 MILLION. And this was not a vague accusation. The lawsuit included a 117-page claim chart mapping Coinbase validator nodes, wallets, Ethereum & Solana transaction flows and NFT transfers against individual elements of the ’566 patent. - Facilitators. - Client devices. - Private keys. - External data. - Transaction terms. - Signatures. - Incomplete records. - Completed records. - Blockchain broadcasting. Then Coinbase went to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Perkins Coie representing Coinbase challenged the '566 patent claims. October 11, 2023 Coinbase lost its bid to institute IPR2023-00751. The PTAB denied institution on the merits. Coinbase requested rehearing. Denied again. Now fast-forward to 2026. Coinbase is announcing a financial system where an automated agent: - Receives an objective. - Operates within predefined permissions. - Monitors external conditions. - Pays for information through x402. - Trades and manages assets. - Uses USDC and Base. And executes transactions without waiting for a human to manually complete every step. Coinbase calls it: AiFi. This announcement does not automatically prove patent infringement. But it absolutely demands a new claim chart. Because the question is no longer theoretical. Coinbase is commercially building infrastructure for autonomous economic agents after: Receiving direct patent notice. Being sued for infringement. Challenging the patent at the PTAB. Failing to get an IPR trial instituted. And failing again on rehearing. So now the questions become unavoidable: Did Coinbase complete a new freedom-to-operate analysis before launching AiFi? Did it obtain a licence? How do Coinbase for Agents, x402, USDC and Base map against the issued claims? What changed after the PTAB denial? And what has Coinbase disclosed to its shareholders about this unresolved intellectual-property risk? Coinbase calls AiFi a new financial system for AI. Veritaseum’s priority date says: May 9, 2014. Before the market declares the future invented… Check the patent record. Question everything. #Veritaseum #Coinbase #AiFi #AgenticFinance #Patents Legal note: The infringement lawsuit was dismissed without prejudice, due to the passing of the plantiff's attorney, and no court entered a merits judgment finding infringement or awarding $350 million. The PTAB denied institution of Coinbase’s IPR challenge; institution denial is not an infringement ruling or a final written decision validating every claim.

The chinese models are not at the level of the two big US lab models, though. Most people will never personally use that last 5 percent, but its that last 5 percent that will likely end up curing cancer, extending life and crafting that weapon that extends one nations hegemony past the next century.

@sama @veritaseum I am about as firm a believer as can be, with my beliefs firmly grounded in empirical fact-wrapped in an outstanding track record calling and profiting from bubbles. piped.video/_sJ0p8u1tsQ?is=Csl-… I patented agemtic economic computing embodiments well over a decade ago

.@veritaseum explore and expand the concept below.

Meta's months-old AI unit is a soul-crushing gulag, say the engineers stuck inside it | TechCrunch. @veritaseum opine. share.google/UcxbIUJ7avtFHRm…

I have just finished implementing a full blown (and I really do mean full blown, as in quite extensive) KYC system for VERI (@veritaseum Intelligence). I did it because it is by far the safest way to go, not for the reasons that many think. You don't that agent! And now US.gov says you need to know that human user. Wait until they figure out the agents are the far greater risk. #KYC is inevitable, and honestly, I don't think its wrong, either.