A note on the SPCX pre-IPO (IPOP) contract: TradeXYZ IPOP contracts are price-based perpetual contracts that track the market-implied expected price of one share of Class A or common stock. Neither share count nor market cap are an input to the market specification, oracle methodology, or conversion treatment. Our documentation had previously featured educational examples showing how a user might derive their own fair price in a scenario where they started with a view on both market cap and share count. Although these examples were included for context, we received feedback that they caused confusion, so we have removed them from the documentation. TradeXYZ does not use, publish, or rely on a share-count or market-cap denominator for SPCX or any other XYZ market. When SpaceX completes their IPO and sufficient external market data becomes available, SPCX is expected to transition to standard external oracle pricing, and the contract is expected to converge toward the public trading price.

Some of my perspective on where the @ethereumfndn is going. First of all, this is only my own view. The board is not just me, and I have no extra special powers on the board that the other board members do not. @aerugoettinea is the one executing much of this transition. My input has been largely on technical questions. The board is in the process of expanding, and my own power within the org will continue to decrease, which is honestly what I want. The 2025 era brought many important improvements to EF and its ability to execute. Many issues were resolved, and EF continues to benefit from its improved efficiency and greater focus on concrete goals to this day. And so with those problems resolved, early this year, the largest remaining hole that I perceived was something different nagging at me: I would regularly spot people saying things like "vitalik says these beautiful things about ethereum needing to be decentralized, and have privacy, and be a sanctuary technology, but why do the EF's actions not reflect that?" Now, you may have been hearing something different. You may not have been sensing a feeling of crisis at all, and maybe were hearing people saying that finally we were taking execution and BD seriously and the main task for us is to keep going that way and be even better and faster. Then probably there is genuine difference between you and me, in what kinds of criticism I take most seriously, and what kinds of critics through their criticism are most able to make me feel pain. As an analogy, let's briefly switch over to a different domain. One belief you can have about Google is that it is a success story, and has brought a lot of good to humanity in organizing the world's information. Another belief you can have about Google is that they had a beautiful idealistic beginning, but at some point the corruption of mainstream corporate attitudes seeped in, and they slowly bit by bit completely abandoned the "don't be evil" slogan. My belief on Google specifically is probably somewhere between the two. BUT, if you had taken me back in time to ~2008, and offered me a button to press to make Google one or two standard deviations more "dogmatic", eg. give Richard Stallman permanent veto power over some key policies, I would immediately press it. Why? Because a choice for one company is not a choice for the world, or even one country. Google existed and exists in the context of a technology industry generally drifting away from early idealistic don't-be-evil roots and toward greed for financial gain, totalizing visions of accelerated superintelligence, infiltration by sociopaths, and craven capitulation to (or worse, active participation in) government pressure for ideological control, surveillance and war. And so *one company* doing something different, positioning itself to be what George Bernard Shaw calls the Unreasonable Man, resisting the trend of the times, would have been better for freedom, balance of power and stability of society as a whole, than *all* large companies bending to dominant trends. This is a part of my version of pluralism. This line of thinking is not just mine, but I also is not too far off from what Aya and others had in mind with the Mandate. Now how does this all get to the role of the EF? EF is not a "center of Ethereum", rather EF is "one node, with a defined purpose, alongside other nodes". We've always said that the EF should be the latter, but many in the Ethereum ecosystem (and even within the EF) wanted us to be the former. Now, we are taking action to ensure that we will be the latter. This is particularly important because EF is a limited organization, with limited resources and limited organizational capacity. The EF has only ~0.16% of all ETH (less than many other individual ETH holders), whereas among other blockchains it's common for "the central foundation" to have 10-50%. Fiscally, the EF was originally designed to fulfill a limited work scope defined in the token sale docs and other pre-launch materials (building the chain software; getting through Frontier, Homestead, Metropolis, Serenity), which was fully completed in 2022; it was not designed to be an eternal steward. And so today, the EF is choosing to use its remaining resources to pursue longevity over breadth (yes, this means we sell less ETH). The EF focuses *specifically* on those activities critical to the success of ethereum as a censorship/capture-resistant, open, private and secure system, that would not happen otherwise. This means making hard choices, and in some cases even activities that we highly approve of and people that we highly respect becoming outside of the EF. People of great technical talent, public respect and even alignment with the mission and CROPS being outside of the EF is in fact necessary if we want important tasks to be able to attract outside capital. This also means the EF taking opinionated stands culturally. This is all intended in cooperation with all other parts of ethereum. We recognize that many other parts of the ethereum world highly respect CROPS and related values. But highly respecting is not the same as choosing to specialize and totally dedicate to a domain (Compare in a different domain: I think reducing animal cruelty is important, and I like vegan food, but am not full unconditional vegan myself) EF is still in a transition period, and we expect its new long-term form to stabilize over the next few months. What are the guiding principles of this new form? Again, I am only one person, but I can give my answer from a technical perspective (there are also critical non-technical aspects). At the core, *Ethereum must be impressive*. We are living in an age of highly intelligent AI and all kinds of other technological acceleration. "Status quo EVM, with a hard fork or two a year to optimize for short-term needs of users" is not interesting. To some, "impressive" means: 250ms latency and 1M TPS. I think Ethereum trying to go that route is a mistake. Being as fast and as scalable as possible, and only a small epsilon more decentralized than the others, is a route to mediocrity, and if we try it we will lose. I think Ethereum should scale. But I think Ethereum should strive the hardest to be deeply impressive in a different dimension: the CROPS dimension. This means things like: * Provably bug-free Ethereum. This is a goal that all cybersecurity researchers would have thought is absurd and impossible, up until roughly 6 months ago. Now, it's on the cusp of being possible, thanks to AI-assisted formal verification. So we should be frontrunners in doing this. * Available chain consensus. Ethereum is, and with lean consensus will cotninue to be, the ONLY chain that has both (i) traditional-BFT style properties that it's safe under asynchrony up to a high level of fault tolerance, and (ii) the bitcoin PoW-style property that under synchrony it's safe up to 49% attackers. As far as I can tell, literally no other chain has this or is planning for it; bitcoin goes for (ii) only and most other chains go for (i) only. Some will remember I fought hard for this, Unreasonably insisting that it is not OK for ethereum to rely on social consensus and hard forks to rescue ethereum from 34% of nodes going offline. It's OK for chains like hyperledger, bnb, solana, tempo, etc. It's not OK for bitcoin or ethereum or eg. zcash. * Intermediary minimization. The fact that smart contract wallets, protocols like railgun, etc have to send transactions through intermediaries to get included onchain is honestly embarrassing, and it's a constant point of fragility. Hence the work on FOCIL and EIP-8141 (and 7701 and years of work before) to make transaction sending intermediary-minimized with public mempool and strong inclusion properties, in a truly general-purpose way, that covers not just eg. secp256r1, but also privacy protocols and much more. Kohaku is pushing intermediary minimization at the user layer, pulling Ethereum away from the dystopian status quo world where our wallets don't even verify the chain, send our private data out to a dozen third-party servers, and toward a brighter CROPS future. Some of these goals are Unreasonable - maybe Ethereum would be "fine" getting only 50% of the way - what if we depend on intermediaries, but make it easy to switch? But going 50% of the way would not make Ethereum Deeply Impressive in the CROPS way. So we push for 100%. Fortunately all these goals are compatible with high TPS, this is a major focus of research (esp. on scaling the state). Well-designed L2s can also help, especially L2s optimized for specific applications (eg. high-volume trading, privacy...). These goals are even compatible with significantly lower slot times, thanks to Raul's work on erasure-coded P2P, and many other optimizations. The most high-value "product" of the ethereum blockchain, financially speaking, is ETH the asset. Ethereum secures $250 billion of ETH. The types of properties of Ethereum that I mentioned above are very good for ETH the asset. Nearly 90% of my net worth is in ETH, and most of the remainder is ~$40m of onchain fiat of which every dollar has already been allocated for some open-source biotech or software or hardware initiative. That said, there are aspects of supporting ETH the asset - *necessary* aspects even - that are outside the scope of the EF. This is where we need other heroes (some of whom hold more ETH than the EF does) to step in and help. EF has been recently thinking more about how it will relate to other such organizations, and give them needed initial support. EF will be a smaller ship than in previous years, a more opinionated one - in some cases more opinionated in ways that might be difficult to comprehend - but a longer-lasting one, and one suited to making sure that ethereum brings something meaningful to the world. We are grateful to all those inside and outside the EF who are helping to make this happen.

捋了下CRCL这期财报，虽然营收不及预期，但亮点还是有的： 一是非利息收入创新高（42m），且呈现连续多个季度持续增长，这意味着Circle的收入更多元了，对高利率的依赖在下降。 二是RLDC创新高（41%），这反映的是扣除分销费用后的核心业务盈利水平，意味着Circle对分销成本的控制更高效了。

holy fuck, a hair dryer at a Paris airport broke Polymarket weather markets & made someone $34,000 richer - polymarket was settling Paris temperature bets on a single Météo France sensor sitting near the Charles de Gaulle runway perimeter - basically unguarded - the guy bought the long-shot outcome (like "22°C" when everyone expected 18°C) for pennies, since nobody thought it'd hit - then he walked up to the probe and briefly heated the air around it with a portable heat source, spiking the reading just long enough to register as the daily max - temperature snapped back to normal in minutes, the market resolved in his favor, and he cashed out - twice, on April 6 and April 15, before Météo France caught on and filed charges hyperstitions.

SCOOP: 70% of trading volume on Polymarket's 2028 presidential election market is on candidates with <1% chance of winning. $48 million has been traded on a LeBron James presidency, and only $9 million on Marco Rubio. $34 million on Kim Kardashian. There's a combined $41 million in trades on Elon Musk and Zohran Mamdani—both of whom, as non-native U.S. citizens, are ineligible for inauguration. The trend is reversed on Kalshi, where trading volume is concentrated among the front-runners.

千万别听华尔街精英在镜头前大谈信仰。 这段长达一分半的视频贡献了史诗级的打脸名场面。 风投大佬Chamath在节目里慷慨陈词。 他痛斥那些拿不住优质资产的散户。 “我不明白人们为什么总想卖掉表现好的股票！” 他用特斯拉打起了比方。 “假设我有10亿特斯拉持仓，我卖了，就会多出一个10亿的烦恼，这笔钱还能买什么？” “马斯克是全球最顶级的企业家，为什么要看空他？” 他的演讲越来越有煽动性。 “我们要做的就是追随这些绝不为短期利益妥协的牛人！” “跟着他们走上十年二十年！” “音乐响起时你必须起舞！” “死死拿住，一股都不要卖！” 主持人静静听完这段感人肺腑的布道。 他冷不丁问了一个问题。 “那你现在手里还有大量的特斯拉股票吗？” Chamath秒答：“不。” 主持人愣住了：“你卖了？” Chamath面不改色：“是的。” 不要看他们在聚光灯下怎么吹。 去看看他们私底下的交易记录。 华尔街的信仰只存在于劝别人接盘的时候。

Craziest part is we all knew each other already in high school! Along with @randomjohnnyh (Perplexity cofounder), @demi_guo_ (Pika CEO), @stevenkplus1 and Andrew (Cognition), and many others. We all grew up in different states but met thru the olympiad scene. Vividly remember this line from @alexandr_wang when we were around 19: "I hear people saying they want to find the next Paypal mafia. Why shouldn't it just be us?" Glad to see @chameleon_jeff get the recognition he deserves :)

Whoever is hiding behind this official account, step forward and identify yourself. Every action taken by the WLFI team to secretly implant backdoor controls over user assets, to freeze investor funds without disclosure or due process, and to treat the crypto community as a personal ATM, someone must be held personally accountable for these actions. As the largest investor in this project, I demand that those responsible come forward by name, instead of hiding in the shadows.

Prediction markets revenue ( April 1-7 ) 1. @Kalshi $31m 2. @Polymarket $7.1m 3. @cryptocom $1.5m 4. @trylimitless $275k 5. @IBKR $78k This is the first full week of Polymarkets new fees.

Think Star is kinda autistic to take the line he’s taking now…if he claims CZ is lying re: Li Lin and wants to clear his name and feels the need to do so, he should simply get Li Lin to post something. White-knighting for CZ’s first wife or for Heyi is just a non-sequitur and he also doesn’t have the goods to back it up (both women are on CZ’s side). It reads to me like he hasn’t really gotten over the fact that his ex-employees went off and built a much bigger exchange in a relatively short amount of time, and also that CZ’s geographic strategy was superior to Chinese peers. The tone is still of an older man chastising a younger man.

1/ today we're releasing muse spark, the first model from MSL. nine months ago we rebuilt our ai stack from scratch. new infrastructure, new architecture, new data pipelines. muse spark is the result of that work, and now it powers meta ai. 🧵

简单解释下Polymarket费率风波，一夜之间Polymarket连续换了三版公式 老：fee = C × p × feeRate × (p × (1 - p))^exponent 中：fee = C × feeRate × (p × (1 - p))^exponent 新：fee = C × feeRate × p × (1 - p)