Una más por favor

Pinned Tweet
Wrote about paradoxes, confidence and why we retreat to black and white thinking. A note on what has been useful to me in life and markets ❤️ paragraph.com/@el33/the-dial…
69
15
199
23,017
El33 retweeted
In hindsight, - NMTD lured many into his presale - NMTD raised 66,100 HYPE (~2.5M usd at that time) - NMTD launched a token and then completely abandoned it - NMTD basically put nothing into LP don’t cry over a $PAPER cut when your hands torn down the entire $BRIDGE.
In hindsight, - Jez lured many from HYPE into LIT - Jez sold (most of his) HYPE too early - Jez launched product that vamps Core volumes & provides next to 0 fees for the AF - Jez stole Machi from Core - Jez sold his Hypurr for a stupidly cheap price and thus ended up shaking out other TOP 1/1 Hypurr holders wow. Never stray too far from Core. Goodnight.
6
4
103
8,371
I farmed $PAPER hard but I think this makes sense. Blurr and Jez have been extremely vocal/clear about the fact that it is experimental, which means part of it is testing in prod. They are now simply doing what is best for the protocol. Looking forward to keep owning a part of the bespoke garment company.
A note on transferability. Papertrade is a complicated primitive, and managing it from a risk standpoint is a complicated problem. The PAPER token is far more integrated into the economics of the primitive than most tokens are in their respective protocols today, and, broadly, was designed to act as a counter insolvency incentive coupled with a rebate mechanism to losing traders. Market makers and exchanges are by far the two most profitable businesses in crypto, and our goal was to try and externalise as much of their margins back to users as possible. We are now just over a week into the life of papertrade and we are becoming increasingly confident that this is both possible, but also a likely outcome as agentic led software becomes the norm. As it stands, the paper token traded as a perp becomes a leveraged bet on bankroll solvency - and being able to short bankroll solvency materially changes the payoff curve of a manipulation attack. The target number goes from the bankroll, to the bankroll + short side exposure on paper. We can, and do limit bankroll size specifically to control this payoff curve and ensure it never becomes existentially problematic, but external perp markets are not something we would have any control over if left to float of their own accord. For example, if our bankroll is $10m, an attack costing $15m manipulating the price of bitcoin or ether is not viable. You simply lose money. If however you were also able to put on $10m of PAPER short side exposure, suddenly an attack costing $15m is very viable indeed. If we were to make the token transferable at this point, we are confident we would quickly enter a state too dangerous to allow any material exposure to be taken on papertrade, an end result that benefits no party beyond the wolves who have done the math on the short and are waiting in the wings with sharpened knives. We would also like to thank the various perps teams who have reached out about pre-market listings for their understanding and patience regarding this issue, and especially to the paragon team who, despite jumping the gun on us, have behaved with the utmost integrity and transparency once a dialogue was opened. Perps on PAPER will always act as a self-limiting exposure ceiling for a token with this type of utility, and we think it would be a shame to limit the growth of papertrade to the extent that allowing perps would necessitate. As such, at this juncture we do not have plans to allow off-contract token transferability. Structurally, papertrade is limited by the quality of the data it receives from hyperliquid, but we strongly believe that hyperliquid has a very large part to play in the future of global exchanges, and expect their books to continue to thicken and strengthen over time. A note on fees. Papertrade launched with a deadband fee from entry of 0.2bps. This means you don't earn anything until the price has moved by 0.002% in your favour. Over the months before launch, we played around with many different curves and fee structures affecting exclusively positions closed very close to entry price in order to try and devise a structure that removed the edge against the bankroll low time frame scalp bots have, whilst also minimally impacting the traders around which and for whom the product was devised. We were never able to find anything we were absolutely happy with and so decided to stay with the 0.2bp deadband fee through launch. This has however meant we have had to be very restrictive when it came to certain parameters, such as OI caps. Now, however, we have enough live data to fully understand exactly which strategies work, and to make the necessary changes to stop them. The changes we are making will have an on hours and off hours fee mode to account for the relative differences in liquidity the hyperliquid books see between these two time periods, and the ease with which low time frame moves are signalled. The changes we are making will only affect positions closed within 6bps of entry (0.06%) in on hours, and 10bps (0.1%) in off hours. Any trades closed above these threshold price shifts will see no change to their fees at all. On a look back to launch basis, these changes affect the profitability of bot strategies roughly 15x more than they do normal traders, for whom a very small proportion of overall winnings come from within this band. These changes should serve to flatten much of the edge our microfee structure necessarily creates on low time frames, and will help with long term exchange sustainability. This should hopefully allow us to open up parameters such as OI caps a little more so those of you who wish to can put on the size you want to, when you want to. It is possible these changes are still too lax, and that further revisions to this structure may be necessary going forwards. If so, we will notify users ahead of time. A note on paper tokenomics. In conjunction with the fee changes, we will also be implementing a change to the token issuance curve. Going forward, every $1 lost mints a fixed share of PAPER's supply at that moment, roughly 0.1% of supply per $1M lost (the exact number depends on the mint rate at the time the contracts are upgraded). PAPER minting in and near insolvency will also change, switching from a flat 100 per $1 of loss, to a time weighted multiplier on the curve growing over time, effectively acting as the house running a discounted auction on its own future cash flows. This change also removes the risk of the paper-mint-straddle-attack, temporarily pushing the protocol insolvent by closing only the winning side of a large straddle position and then attempting to mint as much paper as possible. In the immediate term these changes will only have a very subtle effect on PAPER minting, but in the long run will structurally change the outlook of the system beyond the first few weeks, serving to slowly dilute out older holders and leaving more recent users with an advantage. Reconstituting the PAPER system into something much closer to the exchange rakeback it was intended to be. We have been very reticent to touch this particular aspect of the system for obvious reasons, but ultimately we believe that these changes provide all users with the optionality to take a smaller piece of a potentially much larger pie than the current dynamic might necessarily allow. Other, miscellaneous notes. These contract upgrades will include a few other contract changes, including the addition of builder codes so that builders can utilise papertrade in whatever capacity they choose to. This will be a whitelist only to begin with and we will have more for you later in the week on where/how this will be rolled out. A small change to contract permissions on the reward distributor and a change on how below bust closes are processed by the exchange are also included, largely to block gas griefing attacks. These changes will be pushed to docs in full over the coming day, and we will further announce once the changes are queued into the timelock pending final security passes, scheduled to go live 24 hours after that point. Final note. We'd like to thank everyone that has tried out papertrade over the last 10 days. It has been a labour of love building this product and both of us have been taken aback at all of the positive feedback we have received. We'd also like to thank all those of you who have spent considerable time musing on the system we have built, and much of your advice has been taken onboard and will likely affect the colour of what papertrade becomes going forward. We know some of these changes will be unpopular with some, but we would not be making them if we did not feel them to be absolutely necessary. - blurr, jez
3
1
26
2,514
This is another pre-token protocol I deem very interesting. Most attempts at tokenized XMR failed because they required trust somewhere. ZeroFi is the first I've seen that should actually solve that. If they pull this off, the liquidity unlock is massive. DYOR
2
1
15
994
wanted to share a bug we discovered on lighter and got them to fix it, shows a lot about what it means to be an HFT developer 01/ the setup lighter nonces are per api key and strictly sequential: n+1 can't execute before n. in our benches, gtc and ioc creates took 90-200ms from ack to execution. cancels and post-only took a few ms. so a cancel signed behind a gtc on the same key has to wait for it. 02/ the bug we place two orders and cancel both right after, on the same key. lighter says ok to all four, then rejects the second cancel as "invalid nonce" before the orders even reach the book, so one of them is "stale". 03/ why it hurts a market maker order y is still on the book, and your system thinks it's cancelled. the rejected nonce isn't consumed, so every tx already signed above it fails too. and the ack said 200. the reject only shows up on the authenticated account stream. 04/ the workaround we can't use wait for each tx to execute before sending the next: 3/3 clean. it also turns a 1ms create->cancel gap into 0.7-1.6s. when you requote on every tick, that's not a workaround. 05/ what we run quotes are post-only on their own key. they execute within 0.2ms of the ack, so nothing waits behind them. a 200 means "received" but the actual status comes from the account stream. it took us 3 versions: v1 counted the rejected nonce as used. v2 froze the key for 10s. v3 resumes at the refused nonce as soon as everything below it has executed 06/ s/o @Lighter_xyz we sent them the script pinned to the sdk version, its sha256, raw traces, a control run and every tx hash. reacted pretty fast and in a week it was fixed. that's the kind of support you want from a venue you quote on.
9
4
98
7,144
El33 retweeted
Why are so many people bearish here on $BTC
3
1
17
1,881
Jeff drank a bit too much of his own Kool-Aid in this recent Odd Lots clip. I think it's important to clear up a distinction that makes all the difference. Democratizing access to wealth creation is NOT the same as democratizing access to speculation. Many of us genuinely want broader participation in attractive investment opportunities. The growing wealth inequality produced by the current system is tearing at the seams of society, something I've spoken about many times. But let's be clear: listing pre-IPO perpetual futures does absolutely nothing to democratize the wealth being created in private markets. I've seen this misleading narrative pushed repeatedly by perp DEXs lately, and it needs to be called out. A pre-IPO perp creates ZERO underlying wealth. It's a zero-sum contract before costs, and negative-sum after them. No capital flows to the company. No ownership changes hands. No new economic opportunity is created. Every long has a short. There is no free lunch in simply going long something before its IPO, and funding costs can even determine the outcome more than any price moves. TRADING access is NOT INVESTING access. In fact, in many ways pre-IPO perps are almost the antithesis of democratized access: They create the illusion of participation in private-market wealth creation, while actually offering retail a speculative instrument whose mechanics they are often poorly equipped to understand. The result is a playground for the FEW sophisticated traders who understand funding, oracle design, and liquidation mechanics to extract value from the MANY who don't. To give credit where it's due, Robinhood's efforts toward sourcing actual employee shares, placing them into SPVs, and tokenizing genuine spot ownership are much closer to meaningful democratization. That can unlock real economic value by allowing employees to exchange some of their expected upside for liquidity, while giving new investors actual economic exposure. A legitimate financial trade-off, without the funding-rate and liquidation shenanigans. I'm strongly aligned with expanding access to investment opportunities. And I believe advances in AI and blockchain can dramatically lower the barriers to discovering, structuring, and distributing them. But let's not BS ourselves that launching another zero-sum casino contract is moving the needle on wealth inequality. What would actually move the needle is bringing real capital formation and ownership onchain. Giving investors access to productive, illiquid assets like data centers, GPUs, and select startup investing, where capital can actually finance growth and share in the resulting value creation. These opportunities are harder to structure, underwrite, and bring to market, and we haven't seen many compelling implementations onchain yet. Hopefully this will change soon and, as the industry matures, we can direct more of our energy toward actually expanding access to wealth creation. Clip below. Was glad to see @tracyalloway push back on this framing, and to Jeff's credit, after this he does seem to walk back his original position somewhat.
Jeff Yan: Wealth Is Often Created Before a Company Goes Public On October 15, 2026, Hyperliquid founder Jeff Yan @chameleon_jeff told Bloomberg's Odd Lots podcast @podcasts that when a company goes public at a valuation of several trillion dollars, most of the wealth has often already been created before its IPO. Access to those investment opportunities is limited to a small group, reflecting the limitations of the existing financial system. He argued that barriers to participation should be lowered to give more people equal access to financial opportunities, alongside stronger financial education to help investors assess whether those opportunities suit their risk tolerance.
91
54
947
114,557
Are these riots somehow bullish $SNAP ?
4
964
El33 retweeted
Lighter EVM devnet is live! An EVM-equivalent rollup built in collaboration with @axiom_xyz, powered by OpenVM. It runs alongside Lighter Core, and the two are designed to settle jointly to Ethereum with a single ZK proof 🧵
51
78
611
61,558
Had a hard time finding something worth a cheeky little reflink shill after @Lighter_xyz but here we are. Have been chatting with the team for a while and I like their vision. Spot is currently being outshined by perps, but I feel like it will catch up with equities really starting to move onchain. app.metric.xyz/r/el33
Metric is live: metric.xyz Swap. Provide liquidity. Deploy your own pool. Now open on Robinhood Chain, @BNBCHAIN and @ethereum.
9
1
42
4,783
1
5
751
Should we test our lord's goodwill here?
Dear lord forgive me for I have sinned
1
11
1,153
Dear lord forgive me for I have sinned
3
1,499
El33 retweeted
lighter.isv2ready.eth
51
55
557
43,070
Oh BOY this is a dangerous fucking protocol
I think CPI today will give a glimpse of what Papertrade can be. Fun!
4
4
197
10,253
I think CPI today will give a glimpse of what Papertrade can be. Fun!
i sense turbulence ahead
1
19
11,106
Interview with @SoskaKyle to discuss the generational HYPE trade, what it's like trading with @ThinkingUSD, and how to make it this cycle. 0:00 Bull or Bear Market? 2:49 Kyle’s Journey into Crypto 8:44 “Would You Be Right or Make Money?” 15:52 Teaming up with Flood 21:01 The Famous $HYPE Trade 36:02 Bitcoin and the Quantum Problem 43:20 $ZEC vs $BTC 46:30 Selling All Their $ETH 52:53 Crypto’s Real PMF 1:00:05 Are Great Traders Born or Made? 1:11:11 Memorable Trade (A Painful One) 1:21:39 Cycle Skip Theory vs 4 Year Cycle 1:26:50 Midcurve Traps & Onchain Metas 1:31:40 Hardest Lessons & How to Make It 1:37:55 Managing Tilt & the Art of Selling 1:49:02 Regrets and Final Words of Wisdom
99
174
1,748
309,710
jezz shares his story behind his high conviction lighter ($LIT) trade and how conviction in a project is often tested when on-chain metrics or market sentiment drop leading up to the token generation event. "i knew that lighter was a good thing... i'd spent an incredible amount of time with the team..." "if they're coming back down, that's not necessarily a reflection on the underlying business, that's more of a reflection on like the two-month period before tge." "i had a bunch of posts around there at that time where i'm either bull posting lighter or i'm specifically saying i think the best opportunities are in assets that are mispriced due to investor confusion."
2
2
12
1,966
Doom, and moreover, gloom
Looks decent for now.
1
3
766
Spoiler: it goes up and to the right Even better than the (outstanding) standalone numbers is the mix: RH domain already contributes ~25% of daily revenue at Lighter's 50% fee share. It's showing that the model of building dedicated domains for high-value partners works.
our lighter stats page now includes robinhood instance revenue & volume
1
11
955
Keep an eye on @metricxyz Launching in 3 days
2
14
1,174