@RealSolKing@undoxxedwzrd@quantumcats@ZeusNetworkHQ@f2pool Actually, even 0.1 would suffice (because all your inscriptions are in the first UTXO) Maybe they would agree if you offer to pay in advance (and you trust them enough to refund the original one)
@RealSolKing@undoxxedwzrd@quantumcats@ZeusNetworkHQ@f2pool No, all your inscriptions are with the target protocol here bc1pd46txhc0a3t8juc2r4njyuk4rv3099dcn039ny0hzgt24tgx3qlszg5e6f. And the protocol technically has means to recover (refund), just wouldn't do for whatever reason... You could offer to replace the 0.2 btc in advance
@osf_rekt@zachxbt proper HW wallets sign transactions explicitly, so even if the malware does reach your Trezor or Ledger (that must be connected), this would trigger a signature on the HW wallet which you'd obviously decline. Typically malware targets software wallets like MetaMask etc.
@libevm its interesting how Jared seemingly expanded the market and not cut into it ๐ค Many contracts that I closely follow actually dipped after Jared emerged
Giga-chad move to get access to @MetaMask orderflow, and for @Consensys to make good use of it ๐ I wonder if MEV backruns will be distributed in form of some MM rewards token now or what?
@0x9212ce55 haha happens all the time fren... I sometimes catch myself spending more time investigating why something did not end up on chain vs actually implementing new strategies ๐