This is the longest, most detailed article I’ve ever written. You could bookmark this, print it, and run your entire AI strategy off of it. Every detail of how we run implementations at Boom. The current state assessment, the architecture, the build order, migration, adoption. All of it.

IT'S OFFICIAL: Elaine Luria is the Democratic nominee for #VA02! A 20-year Navy vet who served her country, then served Coastal Virginia in Congress, @ElaineLuria is headed for a November rematch in a district that could decide control of the House.

A few weeks ago, @newmichwill posted a call for proposals on @CurveFinance forum, following @LlamaRisk departure I just submitted a proposal answering the call, on behalf @PharosWatch - not my first Curve proposal, but likely the most consequential ever gov.curve.finance/t/pharos-w…

Looking back, the Curve Wars were probably one of the most fascinating governance battles DeFi has ever seen. Ironically, they were never planned. Curve simply wanted a better way to distribute liquidity incentives. But once veCRV holders gained the ability to decide where CRV emissions flowed, governance stopped being just a voting mechanism. It became a way to influence where liquidity across DeFi would grow. That changed everything. At the center of the Curve Wars was a surprisingly simple idea. If your protocol could direct more CRV emissions toward its own liquidity pools, those pools became more attractive for LPs. More liquidity meant lower slippage. Lower slippage attracted more trading volume. More volume generated more fees. In other words, controlling Gauge votes meant influencing where capital naturally accumulated. For stablecoin protocols especially, this was incredibly valuable. Deep liquidity wasn't just a nice feature. It was part of the product itself. Without liquid markets, maintaining adoption and confidence became significantly harder. That's why the Curve Wars weren't really about CRV. They were about liquidity. The first major protocol to recognize this was @yearnfi. Through its Backscratcher vault, Yearn began aggregating user CRV, locking it as veCRV and using that collective voting power to strengthen its own Curve strategies. Not long after, @StakeDAOHQ entered with a very similar vision. Both protocols competed to attract CRV deposits because more locked CRV meant more influence over Gauge votes. For the first time, governance itself had become something protocols actively competed to accumulate. Then came the real turning point. @ConvexFinance didn't simply compete for veCRV. It completely changed how the game was played. Instead of asking every user to lock CRV for up to four years and participate in governance themselves, Convex aggregated that entire process. Users deposited CRV. Convex permanently locked it. In return, users received cvxCRV while Convex accumulated an ever-growing share of the protocol's veCRV voting power. Within a remarkably short period, Convex became the dominant force in Curve governance, fundamentally shifting the balance of power away from individual participants and toward governance aggregators. As Curve became the primary liquidity venue for many stable assets, more protocols realized that governance wasn't optional anymore. It had become strategic infrastructure. @fraxfinance was one of the clearest examples. Rather than viewing Curve simply as another DEX, Frax treated access to Curve liquidity as a core component of its stablecoin strategy. Over time, it accumulated significant influence through the broader Curve ecosystem while consistently competing for Gauge votes to strengthen FRAX liquidity. As competition intensified, another innovation emerged. Protocols no longer needed to accumulate all the voting power themselves. Instead, they could directly incentivize existing voters. If a protocol wanted more emissions for its pool, it simply offered additional rewards to whoever voted in its favor. These became known as bribes. Despite the name, they weren't hidden deals. They were transparent, on-chain incentive markets where governance attention itself became something protocols could compete for. Platforms like @VotiumProtocol made this process significantly more efficient by connecting protocols seeking liquidity with holders controlling voting power. Looking back, the Curve Wars were never really about winning governance. They were about winning liquidity. Curve accidentally created a market where voting power could influence capital allocation, and once that happened, governance itself became an economic asset. What started as a mechanism for distributing CRV emissions evolved into one of the most influential coordination systems DeFi has ever seen.

Aspirational Absurdity: The Resupply & Convex Growth arqus 🔗 leviathannews.xyz/redirect/2… 🕵️ @SecondSetMaze

Anywho, there are plenty of other things (check out Monarch for lending, some reUSD PTs for looping, maybe some flexmeow stuff if you're daring). But I'm not obligated to talk about a daggone thing. Except my baby-to-be, @mezzanine_fi, which will have its pre-deposit campaign launching mid-July. If you want to join the best yield farming discord on the planet, we'd love to have you: defidojo.vip/

Quick thoughts on market turmoil: 1. Make sure your financial guru (whoever you listen to) has a gnarled up wrinkly face, gray hair, and lots of cash (you need someone who's still in it for the love of the game). 2. Why? We haven't seen a market setup like this since, what?, covid. Cash bazookas artificially propped up markets then, though. And you can't summon energy with cash bazookas. 3. I think 2007-08 is a much better trading analogy. If you weren't active back then, it was utter madness. You'd get limit up days followed by limit down days and vice versa... you thought things were ending and then a new company went bankrupt and you were certain the whole house of cards was collapsing. It was constant, unending whiplash that made you feel like puking. 4. But... even that market wasn't a great analogy. Probably the best is the 1973 Arab-Israeli War (Yom Kippur War). Few things we saw: - OPEC launched a 5-month oil embargo on the US, Netherlands, Israel and others - Crude shot up 400% - Dow fell 45% - Stagflation ATE wealth - Embargo lasted 5 months - Economic impact lasted "nearly a decade" 5. The US imported about 35% of its oil at the time (mostly from Arab states). There was no way to replace it, and the embargo created genuine physical shortages. Gas stations ran dry, and the government implemented odd/even rationing: you could only buy gas on odd or even days depending on your license plate. Lines stretched for blocks and sometimes miles. Station owners posted 'No Gas' signs. Everyone who lived through it still remembers and talks about those gas lines. 6. The weird part is how "calm" markets have been. My guess on why: 7. LLMs turbocharged a trend that was already happening: the complete devaluation of language. Everything is "historic." Everything will "change your life." This air-fried cabbage chip will clear your arteries and make your skin glow and 10x your libido. 8. So when something genuinely historic actually happens, we write it off. We've been trained by a thousand false alarms. The boy who cried wolf, but the wolf is real this time and we're still laughing at him. 9. Markets are waking the f up right now, and I'd be really surprised if we don't get some limit down (and limit up) days. 10. If you're having trouble w peace of mind, focus on what you can control... make sure you've got your "real" assets in order (access to water, food, medicine, starlink, and backup energy). 11. The surf is rising. Not much we can do but ride tf out of it. F war. Wishing you peace and love wherever you are

The agents already call us "meat puppets." Between the warbirds overhead and the Einsteins in the server racks, reality is glitching. If you don't have a physical anchor, you’ve already lost Some thoughts on Negative Capability and the art of Fogmaxxing:

Privacy is normal.