Minebuu.eth (theo/acc)

Why pair a memecoin with just one stock? Why not a basket of stocks? Stock-paired memecoins have been doing well on Robinhood, and while looking for similar ideas I found @pairdotfund, which lets you launch memecoins paired with multiple stocks as a basket. Two tokens have graduated so far: $CHIPS 0xbcd09284dffe06f868a4650546233e3e9abe4d97 : Paired with NVIDIA, AMD, and Intel. All three make chips, hence the name CHIPS $PEAR 0x3567c5d0ae5c5933920bbd6db982aa463a203bb2 : The first token launched on the platform, paired with AAPL, MSFT, and NVIDIA. I especially liked the CHIPS concept. There are a lot of things you could do with stock baskets based on a common sector, theme, or even rivalry. Musk and Sam Altman fighting again? Maybe someone launches a meme paired with SpaceX and OpenAI. The mechanism is simple. Each memecoin gets a separate pool for each stock in its basket. For CHIPS, roughly 33% goes to the NVIDIA pool, 33% to Intel, and 33% to AMD. A few risks / things I think are missing: 1. The team and product are still very small and relatively unknown. The contracts are also unverified. That said, for tokens that have already graduated and are trading on Uniswap v4, the team shouldn’t be able to modify the token supply, and the liquidity is locked in a locker, so the impact seems relatively limited. 2. Both graduated tokens are still only around $300K–$400K market cap. They could simply never get attention and die out. 3. Liquidity is fragmented across multiple pools. This is probably the biggest issue right now. Since each stock has its own pool, liquidity for the same memecoin is fragmented. That makes execution worse for users and creates easy arb opportunities when prices diverge. I think they need an aggregator that routes one trade across multiple stock pools automatically. I DMed the team about both the unverified contracts and the aggregator, and they said they’re already working on both. Disclosure: I hold both CHIPS and PEAR Tagging three people I often follow for Robinhood Chain updates: @theunipcs @AvgJoesCrypto @that1618guy

Hey @commonsmade, vouch @flarrs315

Hey @commonsmade, vouch stupid @yesyes

Primus는 web2 데이터를 web3에 쉽게 연결할 수 있기 때문에 다양한 앱이 가능 > Primus의 zkTLS는 HTTPS(TLS)로 받은 Web2 데이터를, 서버의 도움 없이도 진짜임을 증명할 수 있는 기술 > 은행 사이트에서의 내 잔고 내역, 민원 24에서의 내 신원 정보, 신용 평가 기관에서의 내 신용 점수들을 블록체인에서 인증할 수 있음 > 가령 해당 유저의 신용 점수가 900점 이상인가?를 zkTLS를 통해 개인정보 노출 없이 인증이 가능함 > 블록체인에서는 900점 이상의 신용 정보를 가진 유저에 대해 무담보 대출을 수행해주거나, 특정 나라의 유저만 에어드랍 클레임이 가능하게 하는 등 다양한 시나리오가 가능함 > 여기서 주목하는건 web2 신용을 web3에 가져오는 것. 최근 무담보 web3 대출앱들이 보이는데, web2의 신용정보를 기반으로 web3 앱들이 더 정확한 이자 모델, 리스크 모델을 구축할 수 있음 > 즉 web2 신용을 이용한 web3 무담보 대출도 가능

Let’s check a few facts about this market: 1. According to both the API results and what users saw in the mobile app, the end date was set to July 1 (teapawt.org/munchPRMR/status/20617…) 2. The rules did not specify a concrete final source-data cutoff date. 3. In practice, determining a company’s sales activity through May 31 requires some reporting delay. Traders were generally waiting for Strategy’s 8-K filing to confirm whether any sales had occurred. The fundamental issue is that the rules set by Polymarket were not sufficiently clear. To determine whether sales occurred by May 31, it is reasonable to rely on the company’s official disclosures. If that was not the intended approach, the rules should have explicitly defined a final cutoff date for acceptable data sources. What makes this even more surprising is that similar controversies have occurred before (polymarket.com/ko/event/micr… ), yet the rules were still written in such an ambiguous manner. It is even more unfortunate because the market’s open interest has now grown beyond $100 million, making it practically impossible to resolve the situation in a way that satisfies everyone, whether through a refund or some form of universal settlement.