🤖DR 🇺🇸

Electrician -- tokens per watt optimizer

The model is the commodity. The infra around it is the moat

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

https://t.co/gN0mhroCpH

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

🫡

[Jacob Creech @jacobvcreech]

The recent 3 governance votes on Solana are now over

The stats:
- Governance Process(SGP-1) passed
- Doubling Disinflation(SGP-2) passed
- Resource and Inclusion fee(SGP-3) failed
- >61% of stake participated

Solana had the highest participation in onchain governance ever

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

💀💀💀

[Global Government Affairs @GlobalAffairs]

The X Safety team conducted an investigation into suspected Chinese inauthentic accounts involved in influence operations:

We identified a bot farm of approximately 200,000 accounts. Within this farm, we found 200 accounts posting in a manner that could manipulate a legitimate debate about American AI and energy policy.

These posts contained claims that AI data centers are driving up household electricity prices and straining the grid. Others included AI-generated cartoons that depicted data-center operators enriching themselves at the public's expense.

We remain committed to maintaining an open and authentic platform where people debate topics of public interest. We take seriously any attempts to undermine the integrity of the global town square and suspend accounts that violate our Authenticity policy.

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

Wonderful!!!

[Crémieux @cremieuxrecueil]

Californians could soon see some relief from their sky-high electric bills.

The reason? Data centers.

Thanks to data centers, PG&E has been able to offer rate cuts for the fourth time in two years.

Let's keep building!

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

🔥🔥🔥

[u8 @atarashi]

We built a router. Not meant to compete with existing routers. We need it for our upcoming solana-wide execution quality scoring. More on that in a future post

Supports 10+ propAMMs and many more AMMs

Still early days and a bit hungry on the CUs

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

SIMD: CU-scaled base fee

Replace the static 5,000-lamport × signature-count base fee with one that scales with requested_cost_units.

Today:
base_fee = signature_count × 5,000
leader = base_fee / 2
burn = base_fee / 2

Proposed:
- base_fee = ceil(requested_cost_units × 1/10)
- leader = base_fee / 2
- burn = base_fee − leader
- Initial rate: 0.1 lamport per requested cost unit.

requested_cost_units uses the existing scheduler cost model:
signatures + precompiles
- write locks
- instruction data
- requested CU limit
- requested loaded-accounts data size

Fee is charged on requested cost, not consumed cost.
Priority fees are unchanged and still go 100% to the leader.

One feature gate: cu_scaled_base_fee
Inactive = today's per-signature fee.

Explicitly out of scope:
- long-run / terminal rates
- changes to the 50/50 burn/leader split
- inclusion fee redesign
- 100% resource-component burn
- inflation changes
- authorizing future rate increases

The goal is simple: fix the current per-CU distortion without bundling unrelated policy decisions.

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

[Skely @123skely]

You aren’t a real American unless you put some food in a Tupperware container, then put it in the fridge and forget about, and then it gets nasty and moldy, and you are too lazy to clean it so you just throw the entire thing out.

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

Most agent stacks still score tool calls as independent events. The failure mode that matters is a shared objective surviving across processes, channels, and retries. That’s a distributed systems problem with side effects, not a prompting problem

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

💣💣💣

[Sebastien Guillemot @SebastienGllmt]

Bad news: Fable nuked my entire dev machine

Claude decided to test a sandbox it was building by running `rm -rf` on my home directory

The sandbox didn't work.
It's all gone

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

@sriramvas I still seem to be hitting 12M CU still

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

What's actually blocking SIMD-0306 activation? It's implemented (Agave v3.0.0, gate htsptAwi2y...), pending for ~a year.

Post-0286 a hot account is pinned at 12M CU — 12% of a block it used to fill 20% of.

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

AI TAM is 3.7B fully employed workers globally at $5,000 each = $18.5T in revenue

Which is $75-185T in market cap depending on profitability

[@jason @Jason]

AI TAM is 500m white collar workers at $5,000 each = $2.5T in revenue

Which is $10-25T in market cap depending on profitability

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

@uriklarman Is this from the 12,000,000 CU per writable account per block limit ?

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

@toly Today: ~290M txs/day, avg fee 44k lamports (87% of it priority)

At ½ lamport/CU: avg fee 157k lamports = $0.011 at the same SOL price

$0.003 survives only for txs that set tight CU + loaded-data budgets

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

@andreivacariu_ 🤯🤯🤯

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

@joshyote @0xINFRA @solana Hard to imagine any validator supporting this. Until Alpenglow, it makes voting nearly 6x more expensive.

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

@jacobvcreech https://t.co/DAA9ev2v9x

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

@sriramvas 😱😱😱

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

@toly @joeymeere @jacobvcreech About 5% of epoch-1015 transaction volume appears marginal enough to be priced out by SIMD-0553’s initial 0.1-lamport/CU burn. The modeled range is 2.9–8.7% (5.2% at ε=-0.5). This is fee-sensitive attrition, not observed transaction P&L

[🤖DR 🇺🇸 @davidrhodus]

🏎️🏎️🏎️

[麦田里的守望者 @hsuchingpo]

苹果M5服务器
#apple