investment partner @L1D_xyz | cryptography ∩ markets

i don't think anyone fully understands Ethereum anymore
Ok I just read through vitalik’s paper and if the vision he outlined is executed the implications are absolutely insane especially for the app layer. The paper is basically Eth’s plan on how they will enable computation off chain with Eth verifying the result (ensuring computation occurred and what it did etc etc). Now what this means is the definition of “onchain” itself changes, because instead of every part of an app having to execute inside a smart contract you can push a huge amount of complexity elsewhere and still inherit ethereum’s guarantees, this really does open up a huge amount of design space especially for DeFi. For example with lending you could have really sophisticated systems analysing collateral, liquidity, borrower behaviour and market conditions offchain, with multiple solvers or execution systems competing to produce the best outcome, like the cheapest liquidation route, best refinancing rate, best collateral swap or best way to match borrowers and lenders all while the protocol only accepts outcomes that satisfy its rules. So basically a lot more of the smart stuff behind a financial product can happen outside the smart contract, while Eth still acts as the final layer that checks the rules were followed and makes sure the money moves exactly as it should. The MEV implications here are quite interesting too because more economic activity happening before settlement means more value moves upstream into who gets the information first, who computes the best outcome and what gets presented to Eth. But the thing I’m most bullish on is what this does to the TAM of Eth just because this vision means ethereum doesn’t have to be fast enough to do everything itself it just has to be able to verify everything that matters. And that’s an enormous difference. It’s literally a world computer.
6
21
2,966
"it's so complicated that people involved have their nerves wrecked. Shipping during AI times"
This next fork is a high stakes one. Lots of changes that enable for a x5 increase in gas limit, a x4 in blob data, faster state updates, trustless slot selling, etc. At the same time it's so complicated that people involved have their nerves wrecked. Shipping during AI times
66
7y later, an update!
Suggest blocking some time on your calendar for this legendary Alpenglow whiteboard session. The full video drops tomorrow.
1
144
some interesting datapoints on the new fintech liquidity supercycle by FT Partners (who ran the $4.2b Equinity <> Bullish deal and Digital Asset's $355m series F): late stage crypto leads multiples
1
5
230
IPO activity is ticking up, but still low compared to past cycles. the major change is that companies are more profitable than ever, and revenues per employee almost tripled
1
35
four fintech cycles as defined by macro and tech: - macro: 1) post-GFC, 2) liquidity expansion, 3) ZIRP, 4) "the new normal" - tech: 1) mobile, 2) cloud & APIs, 3) real-time embedded, 4) AI & crypto
34
t-10h and SOL is swapping its engine mid-flight to Alpenglow
its happening! watch the finalization time drop live on testnet.stakingfacilities.co…
5
429
the race for tokenized stocks is on
2
9
617
"the crazy train has already left the station"
I don't think the tokenization story is well understood - so let's break it down Basically - the US Government is in vast, unprecedented amount of debt. And its long term debt is selling off a lot (40%+ over 5 years) - while Gold is up 140%. Gold has crossed US treasuries as the #1 asset held by other Central Banks. The buyers for US debt - China, Japan and Europe are stepping away for different reasons. Geopolitical conflict. Currency related. Political difference. The government is afraid of running out of buyers for its debt. And it's worried about the liquidity of markets. Historically, this concern is much worse when the Fed is hiking and there's high inflation. As typically the response to unstable debt markets is easing (buying debt). Therefore, the US government is very incentivized to allow Stablecoins. Stablecoins hoover up US debt. Tether has different balance sheet behavior than banks and works closely with the US government. Stablecoins used to be assumed to be criminal operations and were prosecuted by the USG. Now they're welcomed to Washington DC. When you are worried about your reserve currency status, you also want to ensure the dollar is accepted in many places. So stablecoins not only serve as a buyer of US debt, but a promoter of the US dollar globally. Enter CBDCs. Europeans see the US government promoting US dollar stablecoins as a matter of foreign policy. Visa and Mastercard going heavy in the space. And see Tether freezing Balances along with the DOJ and say, "We cannot have this. We don't want Trump to be able to use the US dollar in negotiations with us. Therefore we have to digitize our currency" Europe and the UK also have fiscal and political problems. So the perverse incentive to digitize their currencies is not just to ensure 'monetary sovereignty' but also to potentially implement wealth taxes, or balance based transaction taxes. This is also the flip side of wide adoption of US dollar stables. We don't call it a CDBC, but its basically an extension of the government. Balances are frequently frozen. Other policies could be implemented under the left. So rising global debt -> US support of stables -> pressure on Europe to do CBDCs to respond. The US is then incentivized to grow the stablecoin market as fast as possible. Stablecoin's usage is primarily driven by speculation. Holding it as collateral for perpetual swaps. Keeping it on exchanges. The problem: crypto doesn't have lots of good assets to trade. Bitcoin has been very volatile. Most altcoins collapsed. This slowed the growth of the Stablecoin market, which has basically flatlined year to date. Scott Bessent wanted us to be going at 40-50% CAGR not 0. The question then, is how to create appealing speculative markets. The answer: on chain stocks, and prediction markets. Big picture, if you want a lot of stablecoin balances. You need to have good things to trade. Over the past 6 months the 2x leveraged Micron ETF traded more than Bitcoin in dollar terms. Trade XYZ launched commodities, and stocks and commands a large % of volume on hyperliquid. Prediction markets are growing fast. The losses incurred by retail investors in these markets are substantial. They are allowed for the same reason Casinos are allowed on Native American reservations. Necessary evil due to funding pressure and the geopolitical factors I described above. This is, at a high level, why we are talking about crypto in the middle of a war with Iran. And why its' consuming the executive department's attention. The US Dollar is ultimately a matter of national security. This is true regardless of whether Democrats or Republicans are in power. Both have debt and spending addictions. Both are reliant on the US Dollar. But now zoom out: what do you have? You have a bunch of governments adopting digital ledger technology in the middle of a war. Freezing peoples balances. People don't want their balances frozen. They don't want it to be subjected to a wealth tax. Enter Z Cash. Over the past 5 years, ZK technology has improved substantially allowing fast, private transactions. Orchard and Halo since 2022 evolved from something Niche to something usable. The EU tried to ban Monero. Exchanges delisted it. Its price increased. Z Cash is open source. Vitalik is also prioritizing adoption of ZK technology on ETH. You can move ETH relatively privately on Railgun already - but real private transactions are on the roadmap. ZK proofs can be accelerated by GPUs. Due to the AI boom, the number of people with access to GPUs and agents capable of accelerating proofs has skyrocketed. Not only can this technology facilitate private transactions but also proofs of reserves that allow trustless accounting for portfolios. This tech is commonly used at crypto exchanges to prove reserves, and algo stables such as Ethena. Thus - it's not just that we are set to own a bunch of shielded Z cash, as a base asset. It's that you can swap anything on ETH privately. Including stables. Relatively soon. And you can do so for provable reserves. Privacy is incredibly important for large institutions doing financial transactions. They're not concerned with the tax authorities, but rather front running. Slippage. And people hunting their positions or slow moving exits. Many big institutions own multiple days of volume in equities that could drop the price 30%+ if the market sniffed out they were selling. And intervene in FX markets, routinely interacting with banks fined billions of dollars for illicitly trading ahead of their flows. So a meaningful increase in tokenized trading volume inherently will require privacy. As real institutional counterparties require it. Retail is a great market and is less privacy sensitive, allowing initial growth. But for the big players to enter -- you need that. It's not just trading desks that care about privacy. You cannot run corporate treasury functions publicly. People could sniff out that you're doing M&A, or figure out what you're doing -- giving up competitive positioning unnecessarily. At the same time blockchains can offer corporations major cost savings for finance functions. It's estimated - for example, that a properly implemented CBDC could save companies in Germany billions of dollars a year in corporate finance banking fees. There are three basic approaches to Privacy. Z cash style. Private, permissionless neutral chain. Canton style: basically segregated databases that interact with each other on chain as little as possible with a permissioned validator set. And private blockchains - which simply deal with the issue by not having a public ledger or bolted on cryptocurrency people are tracking The argument for a permissionless neutral chain (aka a cryptocurrency) winning is that 1. there's no real reason to trust a banking consortium (i.e. what Canton does) 2. governments hate each other and are only doing CBDCs out of geopolitical pressure in a realpolitik environment. we wouldn't be here if Trump wasn't antagonizing Europe and Canada wasn't talking about joining the EU 3. the tech exists, so why would you want a counterparty in between things if you don't have to The world in which crypto loses would be that governments come to an accord about how to do this. China and the US maybe resolve differences. Nationalism subsides. And people say, "You know what, the externalities of all this gambling and absurd crypto shit are not really worth it - we should just have a consortium of nations and corporations for a global CBDC" There is another world where crypto loses. The debt problems go away bc we enter an age of productivity and abundance. In my opinion, the reason AI people hate crypto so much natively is that crypto is a bet AGI isn't the economic Hail Mary it's marketed as. regardless, we are in neither of those worlds right now. But crypto hasn't done great either. Why? The big problem with crypto, from a valuation standpoint, is that it has never been clear how you pay for all the validators or miners without a block subsidy. And the only coherent way that happens is that on-chain volume, swaps, and trading 5-10xes. The way that you get there is that high quality assets get tokenized and traded. But probably less understood is that an entire swathe of new assets hit the blockchain, and defi functions like borrowing and looping create carry trade and FX trading opportunities. So rather than pendle looping Ethena, you have looping with RWAs. This already exists to some extent in niche markets like Brazilian credit card debt (looped 28%+ APY) but is relatively tiny. Just on this example, you might immediately say "that has huge FX risk", and you'd be right. Which brings a natural demand for FX hedging. Which will hit after you get internationalized RWAs on chain. Which will occur naturally after corporate finance functions hit CBDCs. So you have a sort of promethean progression: 0. bitmex and native perp yield 1. weird crypto yield / credit risk [low quality pre FTX era] 2. ethena (systematized perp yield) 3. defi/aave/ pendle etc (levered yield) 4. on-chain stocks 5. on-chain perps 6. leveraged stock vs perp yield < we are here > 7. private stock trading 8. institutional lending 9. direct corporate bond or equity issuance (USD) 10. CBDC facilitated corporate finance (EUR, GBP, NOK) 11. permissionless private fx swaps <the promethean explosion> 12. looped international corporate fixed income Note that the entire time I've talked so far, AI hasn't really been mentioned. AI makes all of this easier. The most concrete example is that the Norgesbank is vibe coding their CBDC with Claude. But more profoundly - eventually agents will be able to trade assets directly on chain. investment management is becoming increasingly agentic already, with every major lab launching finance products. And banks rapidly adopting AI across workflows. By the time you get to step 9 on the table above, there will likely be investable AI agents. Perhaps in gated jurisdiction. But there will be a new primitive of an agent with a verified balance, and business model that you can buy. The same way you'd buy a stock or subscribe to a vault, or hedge fund. I think Step 9 (companies choosing to issue straight on chain) is therefore the most important thing to monitor given the sh1t show with Robinhood's CEO and AMC. Tokenized representations of stocks have major legal risk, and ADRs (American Depository Receipts) as an asset class have quite an ugly history of being banned or depegging (most recently YNDX just straight up went to 0 when Russia went into Ukraine). For you to get really clean on chain stocks, and fixed income that can be effectively looped for yield, you need the credit risk of the actual underlying legal structure to be very low. You'll also want to see a proliferation of privacy and ZK accounting products take hold that interact with OTC trades, portfolio swaps, and FX as CBDCs come online. That's the boring bridge to the eventual wild future everyone was envisioning in 2023 where we have a bunch of Accelerando esque corporations existing entirely on chain, compounding capital and investing in their own training The Track to Financial RSI is paved with Fomo, hyperliquid, gambling on Robinhood and seemingly irresponsible regulatory actions. At least, it seems mad until you consider the alternative. Illiquidity. And currency failure. You can complain about Trump's ethics. You can stop Clarity. But the crazy train has already left the station. All aboard! It's not like you have a choice.
107
daniel (f1shy) retweeted
Ray and L1D are the best crypto FoFs investors I've encountered, they somehow are able to invest in the rock bottom NAV just when the market are about to rise up quickly. It's my honor to have L1D as our investor.
We initially passed because of the structure. When the 3AC news came out we remembered the structure, knew he was in trouble, and got in touch to show support and because we wanted to invest in that raw talent. He was focused on defending his investors. We tried to convince him not to join a multistrat and stay solo. L1D is invested since beg of 23, increased it's position a few weeks ago. Arthur is a beast.
13
6
106
20,370
daniel (f1shy) retweeted
We initially passed because of the structure. When the 3AC news came out we remembered the structure, knew he was in trouble, and got in touch to show support and because we wanted to invest in that raw talent. He was focused on defending his investors. We tried to convince him not to join a multistrat and stay solo. L1D is invested since beg of 23, increased it's position a few weeks ago. Arthur is a beast.
Sometimes feels like people don’t give @arthur0x the credit he deserves. He rose to fame as cocky VC wunderkid affiliated with 3AC but the untold story is how he managed to survive and thrive after being likely the single individual fucked over the most by 3AC. Working alongside with him through it gave me insane appreciation for his character and grit and I’m happy to call him my friend. For people that don’t know the lore, when 3AC blew up, the liquidators came after @DeFianceCapital’s assets even though DeFiance never benefited from or even knew about any of that leverage. Due to shitty legal structuring, his position was actually pretty bad and most of the lawyers we consulted told us we had a <10% chance of winning. Almost all of Arthur’s net worth was in that fund and he wasn’t allowed to use those funds to pay legal fees. Most LPs didn’t want to contribute. Bro was just selling any asset he had that was somewhat liquid (his NFTs, his car etc) to keep fighting against the estate’s unlimited money (some of which was literally his). I recall an incident where a lawyer told him about how bad his chances were. This mf, under the stress of potentially losing everything, smiles and dropped one of the coldest lines ever. “Look at the name of my fund.” Another time, when I was driving him home from a meeting with our lawyers I had a serious chat with him. I said “Bro as a friend, do you want to start thinking about asset protection? Cover your downside.” He told me no. I pressed that he might lose everything, that the liquidators might try to squeeze him personally for more. “If I lose everything I’ll just start again from zero.” We even had someone suggest given we custodied the disputed assets that Arthur just fuck off to Taiwan with the money to force the liquidators to settle with him rather than stay in Singapore bc it’s harder to enforce overseas. He refused bc he didn’t believe he should run when he’s in the right “even though I like Taiwan”. Eventually we navigated it together towards a settlement that although was incredibly unfair on the facts (tbh anything less than 100% felt unfair), still provided far more recovery than our lawyers (and even his LPs) expected. You really see people’s true character when the chips are down and Arthur has a force of will and self-conviction I’ve never seen in anyone else before. Tiger is right - Eye of the Tiger could literally be his theme music lmao.
1
3
86
30,102
there's alpha in being able to diffuse slop grenades
it's easier than ever to be contrarian and right a fund recently passed on an incredible space deal because fable 5.1 found the physics dubious the hardware team is full of seasoned spacex engineers and physicists a physics phd at a top fund chose to lead the deal in the end
1
206
daniel (f1shy) retweeted
Wake up See a rumor that Mistral got hacked Assume it’s exaggerated Friend with some… questionable dev activity texts me: “No, this one’s serious” Load up Tor Check the usual sources ohshit.exe It’s real Attacker shared samples of unreleased tools Entire codebase is apparently up for sale Good to see that French cybersecurity continues to be an avant-garde experiment in radical transparency
146
417
8,406
1,097,817
chainalysis is earning fees running tornado cash relayers, can't make this up
One thing before I start: everything in this post is public information from my own docket. None of it is new, and I'm not revealing anything you can't already find in the court filings yourself. The retrial just got pushed to April 26, 2027. The order came down today (Dkt. 300). My acquittal motion is still sitting there, undecided. I honestly don't know when this ends. Prosecutors are supposed to protect American interests and go after people who broke the law. A jury deadlocked on the two most serious counts against me. And still SDNY won't stop, because this case was never just about me. It's about setting an example. Don't take my word for it. Tara La Morte, the chief of SDNY's Illicit Finance and Money Laundering Unit, said it herself at a New York City Bar Association event (Law360, Feb. 23, 2024; filed on my docket as Doc. 25-2): "We want the industry to take notice." "What we're trying to do is sort of bring the industry into compliance, and I think Tornado Cash is an example of that." An example. Out of a developer who wrote code. At that same event, her deputy praised the government's blockchain-tracing partner, Chainalysis. Here is what they didn't tell the audience. All of it is from the public docket in my case. According to the trial transcripts, Chainalysis was running its OWN Tornado Cash relayer, and earning fees on the transactions flowing through it. - Chainalysis's own lawyers admitted to "a relayer node that Chainalysis operated"; my subpoena sought documents on Tornado Cash relayer(s) "used from March to August 2022." (Dkt. 211) - In open court, the prosecutor said it plainly: "I think the parties agree as to that part of the testimony, that the Chainalysis relayer earned fees." Same hearing: "there's zero evidence that the defendant was in any way aware that Chainalysis was running a relayer." (Dkt. 259, July 25, 2025) So the company that helped trace my "criminal" transactions was itself profiting from Tornado Cash transactions, while I was prosecuted over software I helped create. And when my lawyers subpoenaed them to testify? - Chainalysis moved to quash. (Dkt. 211) - The government backed them: "Your Honor, we agree with the position outlined in the motion." (Dkt. 255) - The night before, prosecutors called Chainalysis's counsel. The judge asked point-blank: "Did you let them know that they were potentially subject to investigation or prosecution?" The answer: "We have discussed at a high level some of the issues surrounding the relayer with Chainalysis." (Dkt. 259) - The Chainalysis witness took the Fifth. My lawyers learned about that call only afterward, from Chainalysis's own lawyer. (Dkt. 263) The jury never heard any of it. This spring, at the Bitcoin 2026 conference in Las Vegas, something happened that I still can't quite believe. The Acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche, and the FBI Director, Kash Patel, sat on a panel called "Code is Free Speech." Think about that. The two top law enforcement officials in the country. Blanche told thousands of developers: if you're a coder and you're not the one committing the crime, "you are not going to be investigated and not going to be charged." He said the last administration's crypto cases were "outrageous attacks on the industry." Patel praised "the Chainalysises of the world" as FBI partners. And when the moderator pointed at the elephant in the room, my case, Tornado Cash, Roman Storm, the Acting Attorney General called it a "lingering case" they are "continuing to deal with." So here is my hypothetical question. If code is free speech, why am I still being prosecuted for writing it? And if the Chainalysises of the world are the partners, the same Chainalysis that ran its own Tornado Cash relayer and earned fees from Tornado Cash users, while I never did, why is it off the hook? They made an example out of a developer for writing code. Their own vendor ran the same infrastructure, pocketed the fees, and got a phone call instead of a prosecution. Sources 👇👇👇
2
260
next move into prediction markets for Robinhood, they continue their strategy of diversifying supply and expanding ownership: - first listed ForecastEx contracts making use of the platform's CFTC license - Kalshi integration drove huge volumes but more of a win for Kalshi than them - Rothera was the vertical integration move by owning the license and clearing house directly, and capturing better economics for themselves - OG deal gives supplier upside and path to equity perps with Crypto's derivatives licensing
JUST IN: Robinhood $HOOD to take minority stake in Crypto․com
3
16
2,552
daniel (f1shy) retweeted
Liquid hack explained. Liquid has confidential transactions that hide the amounts for improved privacy. A bug in how these transactions are validated caused inflation of Liquid BTC (L-BTC) and allowed hackers to empty the entire side chain. Liquid nodes don't see the amounts of a confidential transaction, so to make sure that the transaction is still valid and doesn't cause inflation nodes check something called a balance proof and a range proof. The balance proof establish that sum of the input amounts equal the output amounts, i.e., that "x L-BTC going in and x L-BTC going out". But there's a catch. Only relying on a balance proof isn't enough. You also need the range proof. The range proof establishes that a hidden output amount falls within a positive range. That means a valid output must be at least 1 L-sat and at most 2^64 − 1 L-sats. Range proofs make sure that you can't mint "negative L-BTC". Why is this even necessary? Remember, the amounts are hidden and a hidden negative amount would allow extra positive outputs to balance against it. Without a range proof, a transaction could say "I've put 1 L-BTC in, and I'm taking two outputs out: one with 4000 L-BTC and one with -3999 L-BTC)." This is going to cause a disaster in a little bit. Once the balance proof, the range proof, and other validations pass, a transaction is regarded as valid and can pass consensus. However, because especially the range proof is computationally expensive, Liquid nodes cache the result of a successful range proof in memory. Essentially, the node remembers "I saw this range proof before and it was valid, all good!". In order to recognize the same range proof later on, you need to assign a label to it. This is called a cache key. This cache key is the actual cause of the bug. The way this cache key was constructed allowed two different transactions to collide on their cache key. Essentially, one valid transaction (1 L-BTC in, 1 L-BTC out) had the same cache key as an invalid transaction (1 L-BTC in, 4000 L-BTC out). Here's the hack: the attackers submitted the valid transaction (1 L-BTC in, 1 L-BTC out) first. Liquid nodes verified this transaction successfully, created a cache key called REKT and stored it in their cache. Then the attackers carefully crafted a second invalid transaction with (1 L-BTC in, 4000 L-BTC out) that created the same cache key REKT. Instead of validating the second transaction and realizing that it printed money out of thin air, Liquid nodes found it in their cache and said "hey I saw this transaction before, everything is fine" and that caused the inflation. The attackers then took their 4000 L-BTC and withdrew 4000 BTC onto the Bitcoin base chain. Note: I might have gotten some details wrong, and I'm aware that I simplified quite a bit. I wrote this post to help people understand what happened. Please feel free to correct me in the comments or add more details below.
83
253
1,468
151,867
the rise and fall of agent civilizations
5
172
daniel (f1shy) retweeted
this wild defcon talk is finally out researchers created a fake defi startup, hired lazarus it workers, put them into a sandbox and recorded their tooling, workflows, and faces from inside the operation starts at 5:46:09 piped.video/live/_uYQr8hfpbI…
41
296
1,954
179,880