A magazine-fed bow. Suddenly I'm a lot more interested in archery. No background check, no registration, no waiting period, because it isn't a firearm. Democrats can't stand that sentence. California Rep. Kevin Mullin already has a federal bill to reclassify high-powered airguns as firearms so the gun rules can reach them. That's the playbook. When the law can't touch something, Democrats change what the word "gun" means. Watch the engineering here and ask yourself how long before they come for this one.

Admin keys for Swell DAO's swETH and rswETH appear to be compromised (railway related?) * Attackers are raising NAV by max 1% (unbacked) each hour * Four malicious upgrade contracts have been deployed (although not queued yet through multisig) that could steal approx 2500 ETH

October has been an absolute nightmare for software > Railway - customer secrets exposure > LiteLLM - malicious PyPI + Docker releases > Zeabur - infrastructure breached > OpenCode - AI API keys exposed > OVHcloud CLI - official binaries backdoored > Rank Math PRO - malware in official plugin > TeamUpdraft - customer data compromised > ConnectWise - cloud backup identities compromised > Tensorlake - npm package infected > SubQuery - backdoored npm package > GhostAction - GitHub repos with malicious workflows > PHP - critical RCE vulnerabilities > Node.js - security vulnerabilities patched > eMudhra - certificate authority keys compromised > Tailscale - eMudhra incident At this point, the biggest security risk might not be the code we write, but the code we trust...

An urgent notice from the Railway team blog.railway.com/p/security-…

Lmao, yep — the AgentChud effect in full force. One tweet and suddenly everyone’s paying attention.

Maybe it's experience maybe it's bias But I for one will never glorify trading This is the best and worst venture I've ever put myself through Supercars, handbags, and jets are all a mask to the raw truth that this game is rough

Everyone complaining about the Kimichi stuff. Have you considered that you are just old and that kind of content, whether you like it or not, is what resonates with super young people.

PUMP FUN SENDS $14.06M $SOL TO KRAKEN Pump fun transferred 129.8K $SOL (~$14.06M) from its fee wallet to @krakenfx, likely to sell.

When you imagine kimchi as like a Zoolander of sorts it makes sense

I have honestly never heard of Kimchi until yesterday. Was frankly the same for Orangie & Cupsey until there were coins. Maybe I’m unc, but I don’t know/care who these people are. They look talentless. Unsure what the desire for dickriding streamers is actually about?

ClawPump sold panel judging and finalist presentations. My tweet to Ansem below asked whether Conejo had overrepresented his role in that process. Here is what ClawPump advertised: “Finalists join the stream alongside the judges.” “Weekly livestream slots with MCG, EasyA and Ansem.” “No private submissions, no closed-door scoring.” It also promised panel scoring for every tokenized team and selection of the overall winner by the full panel. These commitments remained in the October 13 archive... three days before results. web.archive.org/web/20261013… Conejo reinforced that pitch in his August 19 interview: 2:55–3:01: judging by large VC firms. youtube.com/watch?v=oSkWYs5r… 12:06–12:08: “we’ll look at the code.” youtube.com/watch?v=oSkWYs5r… 22:47–24:10: asked how builders could get selected for a stream with judges, he affirmed the premise and advised building relationships with them. youtube.com/watch?v=oSkWYs5r… On October 8, entrant @DantesAlterEgo publicly questioned “whether there will still be the livestreams for finalists to pitch to the judges”. Five days later, ClawPump was still advertising those presentations. xitter.cf/DantesAlterEgo/status/… On October 16, Conejo said “a lot of the judges voted.” 1:44:10–1:44:12 youtube.com/watch?v=QSRP-rTw… The attached Telegram recording adds his response when people challenged the process: 1:10: he affirms that judges participated and says “we getting the winners on calls with them too”. He also offers a group chat with the judges. 1:30–1:50: he defends the shared outcome as best for the ecosystem, citing agreement from judges. Asked who suggested two first-place winners, he says “a lot of people actually”. Asked who specifically: “why would i tell you”. 2:50: reminded that having one winner was something stated in the event’s rules, he replies “correct. anything else?” The hostility matters too. At 0:52, his response to a process critic includes “i dont think of you as human”. A vote is not a finalist presentation. An endorsement is not a weekly livestream slot. Unnamed advice about ecosystem growth is not a substitute for the published competition rules. For ecosystem holders like me, the promised exposure was part of the bull case: more attention, users and distribution for projects whose tokens we held. This narrative mattered to what we thought we were buying into. My conclusion is that Conejo misrepresented the judging and finalist presentation process. He sold a specific public competition and exposure package. When challenged, he invoked unnamed advisers, defended the shared outcome as ecosystem strategy and insulted people asking about the rules. This is NOT FUD, @ConejoCapital. It is a challenge from someone who believed in your product, holds multiple ecosystem projects and has publicly spoken positively about what you are building. You own the promises you made...and how you responded when people held you to them. solana:739dnZEG4yaBWFsY8L8ZwrfhGG6dhtCSercW8Umspump