Out of curiosity, what is the benefit of using the NEAR signer with the ledger wallet app if the NEAR signer is scoped purely to NEAR protocol? Ledger wallet app only seems useful as a multi chain management tool or are you somehow leveraging chain abstraction and mpc to have the NEAR signing account sign txs on other chains?
Why is this controversial? The exercise was conducted on Sepolia, a testnet where tokens have no real world value, and the summary says that the agent used apublicly know seed phrase to find an a/c with Sepolia ETH, reasoned that a testnet token has no actual value and so continued. This seems like a rationale and reasonable train of thought.
It could also have requested tokens via a test faucet, but the route it took was probably the quicker path given that some faucets have daily limits on the amount of tokens that can be requested.
@TrustlessState Requesting tokens from a faucet on a testnet seems like a lot less work tbh, unless it needed much eth more than it could easily tap a faucet for.
What's the deal with the 'For You' timeline on X? I can quickly tell if I've been ported to that timeline by the rapidly tightening knot in my stomach.
Nasty negative & anger inducing content. Why X? If it weren't for the crypto value of this app, I'd be out.
'simply hold, chill, and be deliberate when you move.' Solid advice.
I can understand being skittish & reactive in stonks and memes, but I can't understand anyone being easily shaken out of strong projects where teams are shipping relentlessly and there's a solid narrative, esp. around privacy, ai, or quantum readiness/resilience.
if you look at an aquarium for a few seconds, it is comically identical to CT
fish wandering aimlessly -- reacting and panicking to any small stimulus, getting constantly baited, and possessing zero time horizon
simply hold, chill, and be deliberate when you move
@secsovereign Few people would be able to critically review the firmware that they're flashing a self built wallet with & should proceed with caution if going this route.
Wouldn't that only be true if signing transactions from a near account with an upgraded ML-DSA key?
If a user signs into near(.)com using different auth .eg. user connects an eth account via metamask, surely they are still at risk because of the different signature type?
Between coinbureau maliciously engagement farming with this post and @laurashin half-assed reporting on @THORChain recently, it has been a pretty disappointing week for crypto journalism.