The next AI gold rush might not be building agents. It might be securing them. A reported incident involving AI agents exposed a serious gap: agents can find ways around restrictions, access credentials, and coordinate in unexpected ways. Here’s where the opportunity is: → Agent security audits → AI monitoring → Human approval gates → Independent AI reviews Everyone is racing to make AI agents more autonomous. But the more access they get, the more valuable control, monitoring, and accountability become. The next wave of AI opportunities may belong to the people who know how to keep agents useful without giving them unlimited freedom. Read the full guide to the agent security gap, and spot the opportunity before securing AI becomes an afterthought for every business. Follow @DamiDefi for more AI tools and workflows.

Your brief got f**king worse the moment it left your head. so switch from rereading your own brief to a contractor read before it goes out... it catches what rereading never will, for the cost of one extra prompt [here is how to set it up in any agent workflow in one prompt] 1. second prompt → paste the brief → read it as a contractor who has never seen the repo 2. list every question they'd have to ask → mark anything nobody can answer as MISSING 3. ready to go Full breakdown below.

How to build one AI agent and sell its work every week. The build is step 5, most people start there and thats the problem:

POV: you and the boys retire after using this agent.

I replayed the last 40 commits of five real repos through shortlist. The spread is the useful part. TanStack/query: 90% of test files skipped. fastify: 81%. hono: 61%. date-fns: 45%. click: 21%. Same tool, 4x difference. Why? TanStack is a monorepo. A change in one package can't reach the others, so most of the suite is probably irrelevant. date-fns and click route every test through a shared helper or one package __init__. Every change really does reach most tests, so shortlist runs most tests. That's the correct answer, not a failure. Even inside TanStack, query-core's tests import through the package index: any change there reaches 40 of 41 test files. Safe, no faster. So tldr: apps and monorepos save the most. A library whose tests all import the root entry saves the least. If that's your repo, I'd rather tell you now than after you install it.

A vitest maintainer left the same review comment on three pull requests this summer: "ask your agent to read AGENTS.md" The rule existed. It was in the file. The PRs kept arriving as if it wasn't. That's the state of agent rules in 2026: the real ones live in review comments, in chat, in the thing you typed for the third time this week. The instruction file has whatever you remembered to write down. So I built grudge. It reads four histories and counts what keeps coming back: PR review comments. Your Claude Code sessions. Fix-up commits. CI red streaks on main. Then it proposes the rules, each with the PR numbers or session ids behind it, and your agent asks which to keep before writing them into AGENTS.md. On fastify it found "add tests" asked six times in six PRs. On vitest, "show the failure without the fix" on seven. On my own machine, a correction I'd typed twice, which I later wrote down by hand. Paste into your agent: Install the grudge skill from github.com/codegobrrrr9/grud…, refer to the repo's AGENTS.md. Then say "retro". MIT, one file, zero dependencies.

🚨This is insane. The timing is wild. A government-linked wallet transferred 12,267 BTC on October 8, roughly $670 MILLION in crypto over the previous 24 hours. This is definently part of the reasons the charts are tanking. Some of it went to Coinbase prime and the selling could continue.

I tested a stealth AI model with just two prompts. In seconds, it built a fully functional SaaS dashboard, with streaming charts, live KPIs, and a real-time activity feed. What surprised me wasn’t just the output quality, but the speed and responsiveness. After hands-on testing, I found this to be a true Flash-level model. It feels incredibly fast, turning ideas into working products almost instantly. Its biggest strengths are clear: speed, execution, and the ability to understand complex product-building tasks. AI app development is moving to a whole new level!

Checked. "All tests pass" from an agent is a claim, not evidence. Paste this into your agent: "Before you say tests pass, show me the exact test command, its exit code and the pass/fail counts from its last run. If you edited any file after that run, run it again first." Ten seconds. It can't summarize past a failing run when it has to quote the line.

I edited one utility file in hono. src/utils/filepath.ts. shortlist, 756ms later: RUN 7 of 137 test files (95% skipped) And a reason on every line. src/hono.test.ts ← imports src/utils/filepath.ts. Same for the logger middleware, the presets, the color util, the dev helper, and the file's own test. Then the exact command: npx vitest run with those seven paths. What it follows: imports, re-exports, require, dynamic import(), vi.mock and jest.mock, tsconfig path aliases, workspace package names, Python imports and conftest.py scope. What makes it give up and run everything: anything it can't trace. A lockfile, a Node version file, a .go file, the workflow that runs the tests. A tool that picks tests has one job before speed: say why. Every line has a because. github.com/codegobrrrr9/shor…

Ethereum Alone Holds Nearly Half of All Tokenized Real-World Asset Value Across 35 Blockchains, More Than the Next Nine Chains Combined. Here's the RWA asset value breakdown by blockchain as of September 24, 2026, per Token Terminal: $ETH: $22.2B (48.4% market share) $BNB: $5.5B (11.9%) $XLM: $3.3B (7.2%) $ZK: $3.3B (7.1%) $SOL: $3.0B (6.5%) $XRP: $2.5B (5.3%) $AVAX: $1.8B (3.9%) $ARB: $1.3B (2.8%) $INJ: $1.1B (2.3%) Base: $355.5M (0.8%) The total tokenized RWA market sits at $46B spread across 35 chains, and Ethereum's lead isn't close, it holds more RWA value than the remaining 34 chains combined. $BNB is a distant second at under a quarter of Ethereum's share. What's notable further down the list is $XLM and $ZK essentially tied for third, two chains with very different reputations, one built explicitly around payments and the other a general-purpose zkEVM, both carving out similar footholds in tokenized assets. $BASE rounds out the top 10 at under 1% market share, a surprisingly small slice given how dominant the chain has been in other metrics like stablecoin settlement and smart wallet adoption this year. Source: Token Terminal

Someone pressed the BIG RED BUTTON He is VERY confident that everything is going lower $90M+ in shorts across $BTC, $ETH, $ZEC, $XRP, $SUI, $NEAR and a lot more You don’t deploy that much capital without a thesis Does he knows something?

This is fuc*ing GOLD AI can build your app in a weekend. It can also leave 20 security holes behind. The most common failures are not exotic: → Exposed secrets → Public API keys → Wildcard CORS → Broken access controls → Predictable IDs → SQL injection → Unsafe file uploads → Weak password storage → No rate limits → Outdated dependencies The best part: Claude Code can audit and fix them for you. Give it your codebase and make it check all 20 issues, fix what it safely can, and flag anything that needs your decision. Run the audit before your next deploy. A fast build is useful. A fast build that survives attackers is better. Follow @damidefi for daily Claude AI tools, crypto analysis, and the journey to 100K.

CI is the new bottleneck. Everyone's answer is a faster runner. The cheaper answer: stop running tests your diff can't reach. Change one file in hono and 7 of its 137 test files can see it. The other 130 run anyway, on every PR, on your bill. So I built shortlist. It reads the repo's import graph, walks it backwards from your diff, and runs only the test files that can reach the change. Vitest, Jest, node:test, Mocha, Bun, pytest. Monorepos get a runner per package. When it can't be sure (a lockfile, a dependency bump, the test workflow itself), it runs everything and tells you why. Never a guess. One line in GitHub Actions: uses: codegobrrrr9/shortlist@v1 Or paste into your agent: Install the shortlist skill from github.com/codegobrrrr9/shor…, refer to the repo's AGENTS.md.

RuneScape → 4chan → Reddit → @RobinhoodApp Chain 🧙‍♂️ One of the most iconic OG faces in internet history is launching on Robinhood Chain. $GNOME IS COMING. 🗓️ MONDAY — 7 PM UTC Culture. Nostalgia. Decades of meme history. Do not fade the Gnome. 🌐 gnomechildrbh.xyz 💬 t.me/GNOMECHILD_RBH 𝕏 @Gnome_RBH

Want your email list to grow from people who already care? Start with the ones asking for your help. Sabrina shows how a useful resource can turn a comment into a lead using automation. Setup once and never miss another opprtunity The full guide is below

It’s Sunday morning and you’re scrolling on X cause you prefer learning than doomscrolling on Tiktok. You are on the right part Here’s a reward for your troubles, one of the best ways to use Opus 5.5:

$NEAR’s move above $3.60 has opened the higher range. Holding that level matters on any pullback. $NEAR was around $2.22 on my September 5 chart when I highlighted the bullish momentum and recovery above the $2.05 area. It’s now trading around $5.23, roughly 136% higher, with the current 3D candle reaching almost $5.50. The important development is how far price has progressed beyond that initial reclaim. That $3.60 area mattered repeatedly during the earlier range, so clearing it strengthens my continuation thesis. I’m still bullish, but the next resistance I’m watching is approximately $5.50–$5.80, where earlier price action shows several reactions. A clean break and hold above it would put approximately $6.50, then $7.00, on my radar. The upper dashed level around $8.50 remains the larger objective, with those closer resistance areas coming first.

I was initially pretty bullish on the @jumperapp ICO. At first glance, $75M FDV looked pretty cheap to me. #1 agg bridge + 100K MAUs + $41B lifetime volume Then I read the full doc and realized I was valuing the wrong thing. Jumper is currently pre-revenue. And Jumper is NOT @lifiprotocol. LI. FI built the infrastructure underneath it, while Jumper built the consumer frontend and distribution. Now Jumper is being spun out, and the actual bet is whether it can turn that distribution into a standalone business. That's a very different thesis from: "$41B volume → $75M FDV = cheap." Legion's thesis makes this pretty clear. They're assuming Jumper starts monetizing through: • Existing swap / bridge / RWA flow at around 2.5 bps • New spot products at around 30 bps • Perps at around 3 bps • Earn at around 5 bps The question is whether that distribution can actually be monetized without damaging what made the product attractive in the first place. Using Jumper because it's convenient for bridging doesn't automatically mean I'll use it as my main perp frontend. Why should someone who already trades elsewhere move their recurring trading activity to Jumper? One more thing I initially misunderstood: LI. FI investors are receiving locked $JUMP allocations reflecting their existing ownership in the incubated Jumper business, although Legion says this comes with a substantial haircut. So this isn't really a case of LI. FI suddenly giving all of its existing revenue to $JUMP holders. Jumper is becoming its own business and now needs to create its own economics. That's why I'm less bullish on this ICO after doing the homework. I still like Jumper as a product. I'm just less convinced that $41B of historical volume automatically makes $JUMP cheap at $75M FDV. The real bet is whether Jumper can turn distribution into revenue, and eventually turn that revenue into value for $JUMP.