French Macaroniii

[Omnia π @0xOmnia]

Hyperliquid

[French Macaroniii @FMacaroniii]

@0xOmnia Hyperliquid

[vitalik.eth @VitalikButerin]

This is what I worry Europe will get negatively polarized into: an ideology taking pride in a neat, sanitized online environment free of evil corporate and fascist pathogens.

I hope European govs do not go this way, and instead take a Pirate Party approach of user empowerment.

First, what's wrong with the tweet I'm quoting:

The idea that there should be "no space" for something you dislike is fundamentally a totalitarian and anti-pluralistic impulse. It's incompatible with being in an environment that you do not fully control.

This is especially true for categories that are subjective and controversial, because you end up trying to fully remove things you think are pathogens, when other people have good faith disagreements, and because you give yourself the maximalist goal of not even giving them breathing room, you create conflict and end up building the machinery of technocratic authoritarianism to impose your victory in the conflict.

So sorry, if you want to be a free society, you have to bite the bullet that some people, somewhere, will be selling things that you consider dangerous and saying things you consider disinformation and vicious lies.

What is the goal to shoot for?

You want to create an environment where those things don't dominate. This is the problem with twitter today: not that it's a safe space where 1000 people talk to each other in a corner about how heritage americans are the master race and putin is good or whatever, but that that crap gets shoved in our face on a mass scale, and the algorithms actively favor it.

The right metaphor is not castles and walls, but biological - think, why European forests don't have tropical lizards.

Having incentives for social media platforms to have less of those things instead of more is fundamentally reasonable, @audreyt has talked about how Taiwan has done something similar.

You also want to do this in a way where it's clear what the underlying principle is, so it's not a vehicle for imposing arbitrary and frequently changing expert-consensus agendas.

You also want to empower users, rather than working against them. People want to see and buy good things instead of bad things. Often the problem is that competition is too difficult in the current market. I actually supported the USB-C standardization mandate; it created more interoperability and thus improved competition and convenience. I would support incentivizing social platforms to be more open, and to be more transparent (eg. my proposal to require algorithms to be continuously published with a 1-2 year delay, with zk-proofs to ensure that the algorithm being used in real time exactly equals the one that gets published later)

Being able to better identify what messages are coming from what communities is also good, though I don't support the direction of banning anonymity of individual posters, rather I would want to see more macro-scale analytics, eg. seeing what communities are most strongly saying and amplifying content that semantically matches a particular idea; this can be done in privacy-preserving ways.

There is a real opportunity to reaffirm freedom of speech in a unique and different way, that emphasizes pluralism and pushes against unbalanced attempts to manipulate the discourse by individual powerful actors. We want to do this, not go down the dark path of having something that claims to support fundamental rights but actually is not trusted by anyone to be anything other than the fundamental right to follow the footsteps of a few technocratic experts.

[OhBabyGames @OhBabyGames]

Merry Christmas from all of us at Oh Baby Games!

[//Kalos @templecrash]

🧵 1/5

Year-End Update

Parallel TCG (Mobile Trading Card Game)

Parallel TCG is on track to launch a consumer-first mobile experience on iOS and Android in Q1.

The digital and mobile trading card game (TCG) segment represents one of the most attractive categories in gaming. The global digital TCG market is estimated at ~$8–10B annually, with mobile-led growth in the high single-digit to low double-digit CAGR range, materially outpacing broader mobile gaming growth. A small number of leading franchises each generate $300M–$1B+ in annual revenue, underscoring the category’s winner-take-most dynamics.

Mobile digital TCGs benefit structurally from:
•High LTV and ARPU, driven by collectible scarcity, competitive progression, and live-ops cadence
•Long product lifecycles, often extending a decade or more with consistent content expansion
•Strong retention and network effects, as ranked play, social systems, and metas evolve over time

We believe Parallel TCG will reached a level of product quality, accessibility, and depth that is on par with—and in several areas superior to—incumbent mobile digital TCGs. With core gameplay, UX, and retention systems now meeting a very high bar, our focus is shifting toward market share acquisition, efficient scaling, and graduating players into a broader TCG ecosystem.

At scale, successful mobile digital TCGs can achieve $500M+ in annual revenue with durable margins, characteristic of best-in-class live-service games. Parallel TCG is being built explicitly with this outcome as the target.

We recognize this is a high-bar, winner-take-most market. Our strategy is not incremental differentiation, but to be meaningfully better—positioning Parallel TCG to compete for category leadership rather than niche participation.

Admittedly, this is a mature category and we will be focused on marketing and conversion post release in Q1 to ultimately find edge and sustainability. In short it’s about distribution now that we have a product that’s on par (if not better) with market expectations - I think a lot of people will be caught on their back foot at release.

[Hyperliquid @HyperliquidX]

Happy Holidays!

Thank you to the community for your continued support as Hyperliquid builds toward housing all finance onchain.

[Bluntz @Bluntz_Capital]

how it started VS how its going.

silver has been stealing the show over the last few months.

[Hyperliquid @HyperliquidX]

Hyperliquid is built on a foundation of onchain transparency. A recent article made several claims that are factually incorrect:
+ Solvency: Every dollar is accounted for; the author failed to count native HyperEVM USDC.
+ Integrity: Testnet functions are exactly that - testnet only for testing. They cannot be executed on mainnet.
+ Transparency: Hyperliquid is more transparent and decentralized than all other major venues for perps trading. The entire state is independently maintained by a permissionless validator set and verified through BFT proof-of-stake consensus by each node. Every order, trade, and liquidation is available in real time during execution. Anyone can run a node and index the chain’s state and transitions. No major perps platform comes close to this guarantee for users.

See our response to the writer’s individual points below.

Claim: The system is undercollateralized by $362M

False: The Hyperliquid blockchain state is fully and verifiably solvent. The author excluded the HyperEVM USDC (a publicly announced and much anticipated integration), which exists in parallel to the Arbitrum bridge. Every USDC in circulation on HyperCore is accounted for transparently, by summing up the balances of https://t.co/Fk2lhZvpXD and https://t.co/pGBPcsJUTl. At the time of writing, this amounts to 3.989B + 362M = 4.351B USDC on HyperCore. USDC on the HyperEVM can be computed by subtracting 362M from the 421M on the HyperEVM USDC contract (https://t.co/ohiJm3WzN8), totaling another 59M USDC on HyperEVM.

The sum of the Arbitrum bridge and native USDC balances can be compared against the sum of user balances on HyperCore. As highlighted in the introduction, this exercise of verifying complete system solvency against user balances is uniquely possible on Hyperliquid compared to competitors.

The current Arbitrum bridge was an important stepping stone in bootstrapping the Hyperliquid network and will be deprecated as the migration to native USDC is complete, bringing Hyperliquid to parity with other major L1s.

Claim: There is retroactive volume manipulation via TestnetSetYesterdayUserVlm

False: This is a testnet-only function to allow for comprehensive testing. The author states that “the function’s presence is the problem…capability alone violates the trust model.” Testnet-only features that enable more rigorous testing of edge cases do not undermine the chain’s integrity. The fee schedule on Hyperliquid interacts in a complex way with inputs: user volume, aligned quote token status, maker vs taker, HIP-3, etc. It’s important to test these interactions on testnet, and therefore the testnet chain has a set of admin testing functions that do not exist on mainnet. The related TestnetAddMainnetUser action is to mark a testnet user as having corresponding mainnet state, to avoid DDOS and other attacks that are “free” on testnet. None of these functions are callable on the mainnet state.

While the execution source is not available, anyone can verify every trade onchain by running a node, and sum up the values to confirm that volume numbers are reflected accurately in onchain state. Similar to onchain solvency verification against the sum of all user account values, this is possible on Hyperliquid but not on most competitive platforms.

Given that this code path is entirely unreachable on mainnet, future development work will entirely compile out this testnet-only logic on mainnet nodes to avoid any possible misunderstanding or misinterpretation.

Claim: Some users have special privileges such as fee exemptions or retroactive volume manipulation used to influence the airdrop

False: Like system solvency, user balances, and individual trades, the fees paid by any address is available onchain. Each trade along with its fees paid or rebates received are transparently indexed by nodes, API servers, and third party analytics providers. There are no such mechanisms to distort fees, and no such mechanisms could have influenced the HYPE airdrop. Furthermore, the genesis distribution of HYPE is fully available onchain, and users can verify the historical behavior of every such address.

Claim: “CoreWriter” godmode can mint tokens, move user funds without signatures, crash random validators and basically do whatever it wants

False: The CoreWriter spec is fully documented here https://t.co/TTMWI5pDBB and replicable in the open source HyperEVM execution. CoreWriter is a way for smart contracts on HyperEVM to send HyperCore actions as part of HyperEVM block execution. It supports various actions that are normally sent by EOAs such as staking and placing orders, but has no such features to “mint tokens, move user funds without signatures, crash random validators and basically do whatever it wants.” This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how HyperCore interacts with the HyperEVM.

Claim: Chain can freeze via governance, and no undo function exists

Misinterpreted: The chain freezes during network upgrades. There is no undo function because the validators adopt a new binary at that height. This is analogous to how other networks perform hard forks at future heights determined by social consensus.

Suspicious activity on POPCAT in Nov 2025 did not cause the L1 to freeze, nor were any user funds frozen. The L1 was entirely operational, and any observer can see the blocks that were produced during this time. The Arbitrum bridge was automatically locked after the incident due to abnormal variation in account balances. As explained above, the Arbitrum bridge is not as secure as natively minted USDC, and therefore requires several conservative automated locking mechanisms as safeguards. The Arbitrum bridge’s locking mechanism is audited and open sourced, and the bridge is being deprecated with the transition to native USDC.

Claim: A single private key can set any oracle price instantly: no timelock, no limits

Misinterpreted: The author is likely mistaking the HIP-3 oracle updater logic with the validator-operated perps. HIP-3 oracle updates are indeed set by a single address, but this is up to the deployer to configure. The updater address need not be an EOA. For example, current HIP-3 deployers use a combination of MPC and CoreWriter architecture.

For validator-operated perps, multiple validators can submit oracle price updates. The final prices are a robust weighted median across major centralized exchanges. There is no timelock and no limits explicitly because these limits make the system less, not more, safe. The events of 10/10 show the danger to solvency if ADL is not accurately triggered in a timely manner during high volatility. Hyperliquid was one of the only venues without performance degradation or a network outage during this time. If Mango Markets or a similar protocol with oracle rate limits were active during 10/10, they would have likely accrued bad debt. Further decentralization will involve other validators actively running independent and open-sourced oracle update binaries.

Claim: 8 undisclosed addresses control all transaction submission

False: Some transactions are already sent directly from the validators. Some such as orders are not, in order to minimize MEV, but a future upgrade will incorporate this logic for all transactions in a mechanism that is both MEV- and censorship-resistant. The careful consideration of MEV is in response to trader and researcher feedback based on predatory behavior observed on other chains. There is almost unanimous agreement that toxic transaction ordering degrades the end user experience. Ultimately, the validator set is permissionless, and there is no guarantee that validators in the mainnet set are always fully aligned with the ecosystem. A major milestone in decentralization will be solving this problem, including a multiple-proposer block building setup.

Claim: There is a liquidation cartel with unfair advantages

Misinterpreted: Only HLP may backstop liquidate users, and HLP subvaults are the only addresses in this set. However, depositing into HLP is permissionless, so HLP is a community-owned liquidity vault supporting the protocol. The fact that HLP has privileges is no different from other protocol liquidity vaults.

Relatedly, all liquidations are first attempted against the order book, which handles the vast majority of liquidated positions without backstop liquidation. This allows users to keep any remaining collateral, and allows all other users to compete in providing the best price to the liquidation flow, benefitting the liquidated user.

Claim: There is a hidden lending protocol with $1M+ supplied and no documentation

False: Portfolio margin, borrow lend, and the HLP supplied value were all publicly announced and are currently in pre-alpha rollout. The current documentation can be found at https://t.co/vvE8EhpIhX and has been progressively fleshed out over the past several weeks.

Claim: ModifyNonCirculatingSupply allows changes to token supply

False: The full supply of HIP-1 tokens on HyperCore is fixed at deployment. The non-circulating supply is a purely informational number that can optionally mark addresses as “non-circulating” for display purposes. Whether an address is marked as “non-circulating” does not affect execution. This is an example of onchain information that might make more sense offchain, but is not a vulnerability.

Thank you to the author for spending the time to verify the execution of Hyperliquid. The fact that this investigation could be done at all proves the transparency and decentralization that Hyperliquid has already achieved. Concretely, Hyperliquid is the only major perps venue where the entire state and every input diff is transparently available to anyone running a node.

A similar analysis on any of the other top perp DEXs is impossible. For example, Lighter uses a single centralized sequencer whose execution logic and ZK circuits are unavailable. Aster uses centralized matching and even offers dark pool trading, which is only possible with a single centralized sequencer without verifiable execution. Other protocols with some open source contracts do not have a verifiable sequencer.

On Binance, Lighter, Aster, or similar exchanges, it is impossible for anyone other than the sequencer to see a full snapshot of onchain state including order books, positions, and other user information. The centralized sequencer can also upgrade its software without any constraints. On Hyperliquid, the entire state is onchain, which means there are 24 validators executing the same state machine under BFT consensus rules. There is plenty left to do on the journey towards greater decentralization, but it’s important to highlight just how far Hyperliquid and its ecosystem have come compared to competitors.

Decentralization is progressive, and Hyperliquid will ultimately be fully open sourced. Hyperliquid is the most transparent of all major venues, even though this leaks advantages to competitors (all of whom are closed source), who can copy Hyperliquid’s innovations more easily. We think this is the correct tradeoff to balance value accrual to the community, speed of innovation, and upholding the values of defi.

The HyperEVM execution is open source, and Sprites, an independent community member, maintains a full archival node that powers many important integrations. HyperCore will follow the same path as soon as it reaches feature completion.

[PerpetualCow.hl @PerpetualCow]

Couldn't sleep so I wrote my thesis of $HYPE to $2,000.

Full paper attached 🐄

- PerpetualCow

[vitalik.eth @VitalikButerin]

The attacks on Europe I've seen here the last couple of days, including from people I've generally considered interesting and sophisticated, have been getting unhinged...

I get that EU has problems - GDPR clickthroughs are dumb, Chat Control is awful, they need to be less bureaucratic and supportive toward entrepreneurs, its kindness toward Ukraine often doesn't extend well to Gaza or Sudan or other places, people saying mean things about criminals getting longer sentences than the criminals is just crazy - but the apocalyptic attitude about the issues, evoking imagery of barbarians pillaging Rome etc, seems really over the top.

It feels more like a coordinated attempt to delegitimize than constructive criticism.

(I don't believe the line that "the target is not Europe, it's the EU": I've seen many instances of London specifically being targeted in the hate session, so no, much of it is an attack on Europe)

It just does not match my experience from spending an average of two months every year there for the last decade.

[French Macaroniii @FMacaroniii]

@yippun @NMTD8 Buying more Spot Here only a shrimp 🦐 But rooting for @NMTD8

[@jackbutcher @jackbutcher]

Absolutely insane week, honor and pleasure to work and exhibit alongside an incredible group.

Too many people to thank but at the top of the list is @jalilwahdat my brother and absolute unstoppable force, and my wife @celiapreihs for making this possible.

To everyone that participated, you proved the value of our little world beyond any doubt.

Will write some more soon. Thank you.

[Greeny @greenytrades]

Suddenly you’re 30.

And time starts moving differently.

Friends don’t fall out… they just drift away. Group chats go quiet. Catch ups turn into “we should do this soon.” Weeks turn into months and somehow it feels normal.

Health stops being optional. You notice it in your sleep, your energy, your recovery. You can still party, still say yes, still send it, but your body sends the invoice for the next few days. When you were 20, you bounced back. Now you plan for it.

Your grandparents start to pass. Your parents start to age. Memories that once felt sharp begin to blur and you catch yourself wishing you’d slowed down when life was simpler. When freedom meant time, not money.

There’s pressure now: to do what’s best for you. To choose the right path. Every decision feels heavier because risk suddenly feels real. You feel like you’re running out of time… even though, logically, you know you’re not.

You have more wisdom, more perspective, more experience, but with that comes increased fear... fear of losing, fear of choosing wrong, fear of wasting it and yet, there’s a sense of calm around it all too.

Because suddenly you’re 30 and you realise the goal isn’t to rush anymore, it’s to build a life that actually feels good to live in and that you will look back at feeling proud and happy.

[//Kalos @templecrash]

Although it’s contrarian to say now given the sentiment, gaming has the potential to achieve this and make a giga impact on a token economy via micropayments at scale. For context, estimates have mobile TCGs making between $3.5B and $30B in 2024.

We have to look outside the crypto ecosystem for growth and focus on building for that customer to realize scale - that should translate to the token and is the case for @ParallelTCG.
For context hearthstone generates between $250M and $400M annually.

Make what you will of gamings performance, but the spending players are there at scale for good games. //

[Refik Anadol @refikanadol]

Dear friends, big news from Art Basel Miami — our last unique edition of Winds of Yawanawa sold for more than $1 million to benefit directly 2.5 million acres of land protection and 19 Indigenous tribes of Amazon Rainforest!