satoshiderondonia

Advogado | Direito Digital | Cripto

Insta: @joaovithor.adv

[satoshiderondonia @satoshianom]

A verdade é que nós brasileiros estamos enrolados com esses presidenciáveis

[satoshiderondonia @satoshianom]

@ParadigmaEdu isso é engraçado kkk mas se for botar na mesa, o que a família bolsonaro mente tbm não tá no gibi...

[pepeXBT @pepeXBT]

2020 - institutions were told crypto would change the world. VCs put $33B into crypto, more than all prior years combined. the money went into seed and private rounds. prices fell and the funds were left holding the bag.

2024 - spot BTC ETF went live in january and pulled in $56B of net inflows by march 2026. institutional money went to BTC and AI. the rest of crypto saw little of it.

2026 - crypto is replacing traditional finance from the bottom up. institutions are still dismissing it. they got burnt last cycle and are slow to return.

this leaves opportunity in liquid markets for those still active. memes were fun, but institutions were never going to bid them. coins that are looking to replace traditional finance will receive the bid. revenue and users give a fund something to model.

you have a chance to front run the institutional bid.

[satoshiderondonia @satoshianom]

@maahbtc os cara alavanca até a mãe tbm

[satoshiderondonia @satoshianom]

ou vc realiza lucro ou o CZ te liquida

[nexo @nexocooker]

POV: you were a millionaire for an hour

[satoshiderondonia @satoshianom]

@Memesdecaixao errou... aqui acordamos com as onças, os jacarés não são tão simpáticos.

[satoshiderondonia @satoshianom]

@Jota_Ve69 @maahbtc O cara ta comemorando a porra de uma guerra kkk

[satoshiderondonia @satoshianom]

@amaced01 kkkkkkk

[satoshiderondonia @satoshianom]

70k é bem ai

[Joao Wedson @joao_wedson]

Bitcoin is trading at $81K, but the activity behind the price has cooled significantly.

Aggregating data from 50+ exchanges, the market is currently recording around 17.5M trades, well below the peaks seen in 2025/26.

And this is not an isolated phenomenon. Binance, Bybit, OKX, and HTX are all showing a sharp decline in the number of executions. Bybit, for example, has dropped from extreme peaks in late 2025 to just 3.05M trades today.

Binance still accounts for 8.12M trades, nearly half of the aggregated total.

This is different from Volume. Volume measures how much capital is being traded. Number of Trades measures how frequently trades are actually being executed.

The current picture points to a market with lower transactional activity and greater concentration on the largest exchanges, even while BTC remains at elevated price levels.

If Volume is not falling at the same pace, that would also imply larger average trade sizes, which may be another indication of weaker retail trader participation.

A rising and elevated price does not necessarily mean the market itself is becoming more active.

[satoshiderondonia @satoshianom]

cheirinho de bull trap

[satoshiderondonia @satoshianom]

@maahbtc o lance dele é promover hyperkids...

[satoshiderondonia @satoshianom]

@amaced01 se ele vai em 81/82k e caia pra 70 ia ser zoado, uma pá de nego ia chorar

[satoshiderondonia @satoshianom]

rs

[banteg @banteg]

>be me
>discover effective altruism
>apparently normal charity is inefficient
>why donate to random sad thing when spreadsheet can tell you optimal sad thing
>fair enough
>buy mosquito nets
>save lives
>numbers look good
>feel powerful

>couple years later
>someone asks an innocent question
>why only count people alive today
>huh
>future people matter too
>obviously
>my grandchildren shouldn't matter less just because they haven't spawned yet
>reasonable.jpg

>keep following logic
>what about their grandchildren
>also yes
>what about people in 500 years
>sure
>5000 years
>why not
>500 million years
>starting to get weird but morality is morality

>open calculator
>humanity could survive for an astronomically long time
>could colonize galaxy
>could have trillions upon trillions of descendants
>maybe digital people too
>maybe simulated civilizations
>maybe dyson spheres full of happy uploaded minds
>calculator starts smoking

>realize currently living humans are rounding error
>8 billion people suddenly looking extremely beta
>future contains potentially 10^something people
>can't even fit beneficiaries in google sheets

>new moral priority unlocked
>protect the long-term future

>stop thinking in units of "people helped"
>start thinking in "fraction of cosmic endowment preserved"

>malaria?
>terrible
>but only kills existing humans
>AI extinction could delete the entire light cone
>nuclear war could permanently derail civilization
>bad institutions could lock in terrible values for ten million years
>someone invents wrong constitution in 2140
>quadrillions suffer
>better fund governance workshop now

>friend says maybe we should improve hospitals
>explain opportunity cost
>friend says hospitals are full of actual sick people
>explain scope sensitivity
>friend stops inviting me to dinner

>need to decide what to fund
>easy
>expected value

>suppose project has one in a million chance of preventing extinction
>sounds tiny
>but extinction destroys 10^50 future lives
>multiply
>mother of god

>$10 million project has expected value of several galaxies
>charity evaluation complete

>someone asks where the one-in-a-million number came from
>expert judgement
>which expert
>us
>how calibrated
>extremely thoughtfully

>reduce estimate to one in ten million to be conservative
>still beats curing cancer by 38 orders of magnitude
>epistemic robustness achieved

>someone says maybe project doesn't work
>assign 20% chance
>still astronomical

>maybe project makes problem worse
>assign 5% chance
>still astronomical

>why 5
>because 30 felt pessimistic

>publish 46-page report
>contains seventeen sensitivity analyses
>every sensitivity analysis begins after assuming intervention has positive sign

>critic says you're multiplying enormous hypothetical stakes by extremely uncertain probabilities
>yes
>that's literally why it's important

>critic says the uncertainty might be structural rather than numerical
>make probability smaller
>critic says no, I mean maybe your model is wrong
>make probability smaller again
>critic begins rubbing temples

>discover AI safety
>perfect longtermist cause
>AI might kill everyone
>or create utopia
>or seize galaxy
>or tile universe with paperclips
>or create billions of conscious software minds
>finally a problem with numbers big enough for me

>start AI safety nonprofit
>mission: prevent dangerous AI
>hire smartest people available
>smartest people immediately start building better AI to understand dangerous AI
>interesting

>we must understand capabilities to understand safety
>we must scale models to study alignment
>we must race ahead so less responsible actors don't get there first
>we must deploy systems to learn how deployment can go wrong
>we must build the thing quickly because building the thing quickly is dangerous

>outsider asks why the people most worried about AI apocalypse all work at AI companies
>complicated field

>company releases stronger model
>very concerned
>company begins training even stronger model
>extremely concerned
>company raises $14 billion
>concern reaches unprecedented levels

>need to influence government
>future is at stake
>normal democratic process too slow
>politicians don't understand exponential curves
>public doesn't understand x-risk
>experts must guide them
>who counts as expert
>people who understand x-risk
>who understands x-risk
>our friends

>someone objects that this seems politically convenient
>explain we're representing future generations
>future generations unavailable for comment

>develop concept of value lock-in
>terrifying possibility that one ideology controls civilization forever
>therefore extremely important that civilization adopts correct values before lock-in
>whose values
>let's circle back

>begin with impartial morality
>end with small group of people deciding what quadrillions of hypothetical beings would want
>beautiful arc

>meanwhile actual humans keep doing annoying things
>voting wrong
>having parochial attachments
>loving family more than strangers
>caring about local community
>getting upset when told their suffering is cosmically negligible
>evolutionary biases everywhere

>explain that moral intuition cannot be trusted
>except intuition that future digital people count
>and intuition that extinction is uniquely bad
>and intuition that our probability estimates are sane
>and intuition that our institutional choices improve the future
>those intuitions survived peer review

>someone donates $5k to local homeless shelter
>inefficient
>could have funded 0.0000000000003% of an AI governance researcher
>think of all the simulated people you just killed

>okay maybe don't phrase it that way publicly

>PR team says "future generations deserve a voice"
>much better

>journalist asks what longtermism means
>say "future people matter"
>everyone agrees
>great
>journalist asks what follows from that
>well technically we should redirect enormous resources toward low-probability interventions affecting astronomical futures
>journalist raises eyebrow
>return to "future people matter"

>motte has entered the chat

>critic: of course future people matter
>me: glad we agree
>critic: I don't agree that your institute knows how to help them
>me: why do you hate our grandchildren

>eventually notice uncomfortable implication
>if future value dominates everything
>then helping people today mostly matters through effects on future
>education matters because future institutions
>health matters because future productivity
>democracy matters because future trajectory
>human beings slowly become instrumental variables in their own moral philosophy

>see starving child
>feel compassion
>check spreadsheet
>child's direct welfare contribution negligible
>but perhaps childhood nutrition improves national institutional quality
>compassion restored

>tell myself this is impartial altruism

>one day assistant asks obvious question
>"how do you know your intervention actually improves the far future?"

>silence

>open spreadsheet
>increase column width
>add confidence interval

>assistant asks again
>"no, I mean how do you know the sign is positive?"

>stare into cosmic light cone

>10^50 people staring back

>none of them exist
>none of them can tell me
>none of them can falsify my assumptions

>realize I have invented the perfect constituency

>infinitely important
>completely silent
>and always represented by me

[satoshiderondonia @satoshianom]

O que fazer antes de tomar uma decisão que pode trazer consequências boas, mas tbm pode trazer consequências ruins?

[satoshiderondonia @satoshianom]

@amaced01 Cara, sonhei há uns dois dias atrás que BTC tinha caído para 70k... 🧙‍♂️

[satoshiderondonia @satoshianom]

@guiriba comunidades disputando liquidez

[satoshiderondonia @satoshianom]

Flávio atolado em corrupção e mesmo acham que ele é o caminho? Sem falar que ele vai entregar o brasil de graça para o Trump... não tem a menor chance de eu votar nisso.

[satoshiderondonia @satoshianom]

A caixa não vai resolver essa merda dessa grave?

[satoshiderondonia @satoshianom]

Vcs caíram no clickbait... Acham mesmo que isso será aceito tão rápido? Muitos brasileiros tem complexo de vira-lata, mas mal sabem que a legislação brasileira está muito na frente da americana quando o assunto é cripto.

[Watcher.Guru @WatcherGuru]

JUST IN: 🇺🇸 Democrats reject Republican crypto Clarity Act draft bill over ethics language.

[satoshiderondonia @satoshianom]

@DaviGoncalves @krugergab @rodcacioli Joga no Jusbrasil, vai achar vários precedentes.