Validatus - verifying blockchain entries on purely Enterprise Linux based systems with regular security audits. Stay safe. Stake with us.
on-chain
Joined September 2021
- Tweets52.3K
- Following1.3K
- Followers4.6K
- Likes39.4K
Pinned Tweet
If you’re running validators, you know it’s more than just keeping them online.
It’s about catching problems before they happen & staying ahead of anything weird.
We built a system that helps us do exactly that. Here’s how we set it up and why it can be a game changer.
Yesterday we shared a practical checklist for judging any @osmosis validator, uptime, commission, security posture, governance participation, and services contributed to the network, rather than looking only at headline APR.
xitter.cf/stakeingermany/status/…
So who are we?
Validatus is an infrastructure-focused validator operator. We’re currently outside Osmosis’ active set and working to return to it. In the meantime we continue operating an Osmosis archive node so historical data stays available, and we keep contributing beyond pure consensus.
We don’t claim to be active or bonded right now. What you can verify is the archive endpoint, our public operator information, and the work we’re doing on the infrastructure side.
If you have technical questions about the archive node or anything else we run, ask them here happy to answer with verifiable details.
Yesterday we walked through how redelegation works on @osmosis you can switch validators without unbonding first, but there’s a 14-day cooldown before you can move that same stake again.
xitter.cf/stakeingermany/status/…
Once you’re looking at who to delegate to, the headline APR isn’t the only thing that matters.
A more useful checklist usually includes:
✅Uptime and reliability
✅Commission rate
✅Security practices and operational posture
✅Governance participation
✅Any public infrastructure or services they contribute to the network
These factors apply to every validator, not just one. We’re happy to show the evidence behind how we operate rather than ask anyone to trust us blindly.
What do you weigh most when choosing a validator?
👉🏻Uptime
👉🏻Commission
👉🏻Governance participation
👉🏻Public infrastructure / services
Yesterday we walked through how redelegation works on @osmosis you can switch validators without unbonding first, but there’s a 14-day cooldown before you can move that same stake again.
xitter.cf/stakeingermany/status/…
Once you’re looking at who to delegate to, the headline APR isn’t the only thing that matters.
A more useful checklist usually includes:
✅Uptime and reliability
✅Commission rate
✅Security practices and operational posture
✅Governance participation
✅Any public infrastructure or services they contribute to the network
These factors apply to every validator, not just one. We’re happy to show the evidence behind how we operate rather than ask anyone to trust us blindly.
What do you weigh most when choosing a validator?
👉🏻Uptime
👉🏻Commission
👉🏻Governance participation
👉🏻Public infrastructure / services
Yesterday we covered what happens to your stake when a validator falls outside the active set: your OSMO stays safe, but staking rewards stop until you move to an active validator.
xitter.cf/stakeingermany/status/…
If you decide to switch, you don’t have to unbond first. Redelegation lets you move your stake directly from one validator to another.
A few things worth checking before you do it:
👉🏻Make sure the destination validator is currently in the active set.
👉🏻Look at their commission, uptime, and any other details that matter to you.
👉🏻After you redelegate, there’s a 14-day restriction before you can redelegate that same stake again.
There’s no need to rush. Take a minute to review the details, then confirm in your wallet.
Most wallets show a clear “Redelegate” option once you select the source and destination. If you’re unsure about the exact steps in yours, the official Osmosis or Keplr docs walk through it.
Happy to answer general how-to questions here, just never share your seed phrase or private keys with anyone.
Have you redelegated on @osmosis before, or is this your first time looking at it?
Yesterday we covered what happens to your stake when a validator falls outside the active set: your OSMO stays safe, but staking rewards stop until you move to an active validator.
xitter.cf/stakeingermany/status/…
If you decide to switch, you don’t have to unbond first. Redelegation lets you move your stake directly from one validator to another.
A few things worth checking before you do it:
👉🏻Make sure the destination validator is currently in the active set.
👉🏻Look at their commission, uptime, and any other details that matter to you.
👉🏻After you redelegate, there’s a 14-day restriction before you can redelegate that same stake again.
There’s no need to rush. Take a minute to review the details, then confirm in your wallet.
Most wallets show a clear “Redelegate” option once you select the source and destination. If you’re unsure about the exact steps in yours, the official Osmosis or Keplr docs walk through it.
Happy to answer general how-to questions here, just never share your seed phrase or private keys with anyone.
Have you redelegated on @osmosis before, or is this your first time looking at it?
Yesterday we looked at why @osmosis reduced the active set to 30, faster coordination and more sustainable operations on one side, fewer independent operators on the other.
xitter.cf/stakeingermany/status/…
Here’s what that change actually means for your stake:
If the validator you’re delegated to falls outside the active set, your OSMO stays safe. Nothing is confiscated or locked beyond the normal rules. You can still undelegate or redelegate whenever you want.
What stops is the staking rewards. As long as that validator remains outside the top 30, it is not earning consensus rewards, and neither is your stake.
If you want rewards right now, you need to be delegated to one of the current active validators. We won’t pretend that moving to an inactive validator (including us) changes that.
Quick check you can do yourself: open your wallet, look at the validator you’re currently delegated to, and see whether it shows as active. Most wallets make the status visible without needing to do anything else.
Have you checked yours yet?
🔗Osmosis: app.osmosis.zone/stake
🔗Validator Explorer: osmosis.valopers.com/validat…
Yesterday we looked at why @osmosis reduced the active set to 30, faster coordination and more sustainable operations on one side, fewer independent operators on the other.
xitter.cf/stakeingermany/status/…
Here’s what that change actually means for your stake:
If the validator you’re delegated to falls outside the active set, your OSMO stays safe. Nothing is confiscated or locked beyond the normal rules. You can still undelegate or redelegate whenever you want.
What stops is the staking rewards. As long as that validator remains outside the top 30, it is not earning consensus rewards, and neither is your stake.
If you want rewards right now, you need to be delegated to one of the current active validators. We won’t pretend that moving to an inactive validator (including us) changes that.
Quick check you can do yourself: open your wallet, look at the validator you’re currently delegated to, and see whether it shows as active. Most wallets make the status visible without needing to do anything else.
Have you checked yours yet?
🔗Osmosis: app.osmosis.zone/stake
🔗Validator Explorer: osmosis.valopers.com/validat…
Yesterday we covered Prop 1051: @osmosis cut the active validator set from 70 to 30.
Only the top 30 earn consensus rewards now, and delegators outside that set can redelegate anytime with no unbonding period.
xitter.cf/stakeingermany/status/…
So why make that cut in the first place?
The proposal pointed to three main reasons: faster coordination during incidents and upgrades, less consensus overhead, and more sustainable operations once protocol revenue is shared among fewer validators.
Those arguments are reasonable. A smaller set can move quicker when something needs fixing, and it becomes more realistic for operators to run on actual fees instead of inflation.
At the same time, it does reduce the number of independent operators actively participating in consensus. Long-standing validators who fell outside the top 30 (including us) stopped earning rewards. The concentration of stake didn’t shift as sharply as the raw number of slots, but fewer voices are now in the active set.
We voted against the reduction for that reason. We’re still running an archive node and remain committed to the chain, but we think the trade-off is worth talking through openly rather than treating it as purely good or purely bad.
How do you weigh the reliability and sustainability side against the decentralization side?
Curious where people actually land on this.
🔗Full proposal discussion: forum.osmosis.zone/t/reduce-…
Yesterday we covered Prop 1051: @osmosis cut the active validator set from 70 to 30.
Only the top 30 earn consensus rewards now, and delegators outside that set can redelegate anytime with no unbonding period.
xitter.cf/stakeingermany/status/…
So why make that cut in the first place?
The proposal pointed to three main reasons: faster coordination during incidents and upgrades, less consensus overhead, and more sustainable operations once protocol revenue is shared among fewer validators.
Those arguments are reasonable. A smaller set can move quicker when something needs fixing, and it becomes more realistic for operators to run on actual fees instead of inflation.
At the same time, it does reduce the number of independent operators actively participating in consensus. Long-standing validators who fell outside the top 30 (including us) stopped earning rewards. The concentration of stake didn’t shift as sharply as the raw number of slots, but fewer voices are now in the active set.
We voted against the reduction for that reason. We’re still running an archive node and remain committed to the chain, but we think the trade-off is worth talking through openly rather than treating it as purely good or purely bad.
How do you weigh the reliability and sustainability side against the decentralization side?
Curious where people actually land on this.
🔗Full proposal discussion: forum.osmosis.zone/t/reduce-…
Since @osmosis Prop 1051 has passed, the active validator set is now capped at 30 (down from 70). What this means for delegators:
Only the top 30 validators by voting power earn consensus rewards.
Validators outside the active set do not earn rewards.
Your OSMO is not confiscated. You can redelegate to an active validator at any time with no unbonding period.
The change is part of the broader effort to simplify Osmosis, fewer validators, lower overhead, and rewards more tightly linked to actual protocol usage. We are currently outside the active set and are working to re-enter.
In the meantime we continue running an Osmosis archive node so historical data remains available. For the next 10 days we will stick to facts, not hype.
Did you check which validator currently holds your OSMO?
🔗Osmosis Prop 1051: daodao.zone/dao/osmosis/prop…
🔗Full proposal discussion:forum.osmosis.zone/t/reduce-…
xitter.cf/osmosis/status/2110739…
Since @osmosis Prop 1051 has passed, the active validator set is now capped at 30 (down from 70). What this means for delegators:
Only the top 30 validators by voting power earn consensus rewards.
Validators outside the active set do not earn rewards.
Your OSMO is not confiscated. You can redelegate to an active validator at any time with no unbonding period.
The change is part of the broader effort to simplify Osmosis, fewer validators, lower overhead, and rewards more tightly linked to actual protocol usage. We are currently outside the active set and are working to re-enter.
In the meantime we continue running an Osmosis archive node so historical data remains available. For the next 10 days we will stick to facts, not hype.
Did you check which validator currently holds your OSMO?
🔗Osmosis Prop 1051: daodao.zone/dao/osmosis/prop…
🔗Full proposal discussion:forum.osmosis.zone/t/reduce-…
xitter.cf/osmosis/status/2110739…
Governance passed two more steps in simplifying Osmosis.
Prop 1051: active validators go from 70 to 30. If your validator is outside the top 30, redelegate.
Prop 1052: stakers' share of non-OSMO taker fees goes from 22.5% to 47.5%. The burn share is unchanged.
daodao.zone/dao/osmosis/prop…
daodao.zone/dao/osmosis/prop…
Validatus.com retweeted
Some personal news: I’m closing the chapter on Binary Builders.
Most of the Binary team has joined Celestia. I’ve been involved with Celestia since the very beginning, and the team there is great. I’m excited to see what they build together.
I decided not to join, I’m taking a break to recharge and explore new ideas.
Binary Builders will no longer take on new projects. Our validators will transition to Validatus over the next few weeks.
Running Binary taught me how to build a company, an engineering team, and a business from scratch. It was hard, and I loved every part of it.
Thank you to everyone who worked at Binary, to our clients, to our delegators who trusted us, and to Cosmos and Celestia for years of partnership.
If you’re working on something interesting, my DMs are always open.
We voted NO on Proposal 1051 because reducing the Osmosis active validator set to just 30 puts long-standing contributors like us at risk of being excluded.
We’ve been validating on Osmosis since day one and remained in the active set through every previous reduction. Now, ranked #44, we’re no longer active.
Beyond validating, we also maintain a full archival node, providing researchers and the community access to historical Osmosis data — infrastructure that comes with significant ongoing costs.
We remain committed to Osmosis and believe the contributions validators make to the broader ecosystem deserve recognition. We hope the community continues to value decentralization, long-term commitment, and public infrastructure.
Two more steps in simplifying Osmosis are voting onchain.
Prop 1051: active validators go from 70 to 30.
Prop 1052: stakers' share of non-OSMO taker fees goes from 22.5% to 47.5%. The burn share is unchanged.
Voting ends October 14.
daodao.zone/dao/osmosis/prop…
daodao.zone/dao/osmosis/prop…
Validatus.com retweeted
Reminder for Persistence DEX liquidity providers
1) Babylon Genesis
Persistence DEX on Babylon Genesis is deprecated, as announced on 7 September. New deposits are paused. Swaps and withdrawals stay open, so please withdraw your positions at app.persistence.one/pools with Babylon selected.
2) Persistence Core: USDC/USDT and DYDX/USDC pools
These two pools are being wound down because Circle is retiring USDC on Noble. Circle has stopped minting it, from 31 October the routes to move Noble USDC start closing, and on 12 January 2027 the Noble USDC contract is paused for good. New deposits are paused; swaps and withdrawals stay open.
How to exit, on either chain:
• If your LP tokens are staked, unbond them first. This takes 7 days, or you can instant unbond for a small fee.
• Withdraw from the pool at app.persistence.one/pools.
• Move any Noble USDC out, for example to Injective issued USDC via Skip Go (go.skip.build).
All other pools on Persistence Core are unaffected and continue as normal.
Update on the Persistence DEX USDC pools
As announced last week, new deposits into the USDC/USDT and DYDX/USDC pools are now paused. Swaps and withdrawals remain open.
If you still provide liquidity in either pool, please withdraw and migrate your Noble USDC before Circle's deadline of 12 January 2027.
Skip Go (go.skip.build) supports a direct migration to Injective issued USDC. All other pools, and USDT, are unaffected.
Validatus.com retweeted
A prospective customer with extreme throughput requirements asked how much capacity Fibre can really deliver. So we ran an end-to-end benchmark across 120 validators.
It sustained 3.07 Tb/s of throughput, enough data for nearly 2 billion transactions per second. Every transaction Visa processed in 2025 would fit in just over two minutes.
Full breakdown: blog.celestia.org/celestia-f…
Validatus.com retweeted
Update on the Persistence DEX USDC pools
As announced last week, new deposits into the USDC/USDT and DYDX/USDC pools are now paused. Swaps and withdrawals remain open.
If you still provide liquidity in either pool, please withdraw and migrate your Noble USDC before Circle's deadline of 12 January 2027.
Skip Go (go.skip.build) supports a direct migration to Injective issued USDC. All other pools, and USDT, are unaffected.
Circle is winding down USDC on Noble, the USDC used across Cosmos including Persistence. Minting stops 13 Oct, the Noble contract is paused 12 Jan 2027.
Persistence DEX: the USDC/USDT and DYDX/USDC pools are being deprecated. Withdrawals stay open. If you provide liquidity there, please withdraw and migrate your USDC via Skip Go before the deadline. USDT and all other pools are unaffected.
Validatus.com retweeted
Important: GNOT Distribution on Mainnet
GNOT auction participants who submitted their GNOT addresses prior to 06:30 AM September 11 (UTC) have received their GNOT on mainnet. While these tokens are not yet transferable, they will be before trading begins on KuCoin and Kraken.
Those who submitted their GNOT address after the cutoff date will receive GNOT tomorrow, before trading begins.
If you haven’t submitted your GNOT address yet, please do so before 08:00 AM September 16 (UTC). If you don't submit your address before then, you will likely receive GNOT after trading begins.
Submit your address: sale.gno.land/distribution
Validatus.com retweeted
Cosmostation Wallet Service Discontinuation Notice
After careful consideration, we have decided to discontinue Cosmostation Wallet.
We sincerely thank everyone who has used the Cosmostation Wallet over the years. Your trust and support have enabled Cosmostation Wallet to grow and support a wide range of blockchain ecosystems.
This was not an easy decision. We continue to believe in the long-term future of blockchain and the interchain ecosystem, and we hope to continue contributing to the ecosystem in various ways.
Service Discontinuation Schedule
Starting September 1, 2026, Cosmostation Wallet will only support the following two features:
• exporting recovery phrases
• exporting private keys.
All the other features will be gradually discontinued and will no longer be available.
This service discontinuation applies to:
• Cosmostation Wallet (iOS)
• Cosmostation Wallet (Android)
• Cosmostation Wallet Chrome Extension
What You Need to Do
If you currently use Cosmostation Wallet, please make sure to securely back up your recovery phrase or private key before September 1, 2026.
Cosmostation Wallet is a non-custodial wallet, which means your assets remain on their respective blockchains and are not stored in Cosmostation wallet.
As long as you have your recovery phrase or private key, you can continue to access your existing assets by importing your wallet into another compatible wallet.
After Service Discontinuation
As existing features are gradually discontinued, only recovery phrases and private key export will remain available.
Once Cosmostation Wallet is fully discontinued, access to the applications will also no longer be available. We therefore strongly recommend backing up your recovery phrase or private key in advance.
Thank You
We sincerely thank everyone who has trusted and used Cosmostation Wallet over the years.
The time we have shared with you has meant a lot to us.
Validatus.com retweeted
There's still a significant amount of liquidity remaining on @ux_xyz that needs to be withdrawn from the UX (Ex Umee) chain before July 1st . Make sure to remove your liquidity before the deadline!
app.ux.xyz/markets
This Post is from an account that no longer exists. Learn more
Validatus.com retweeted
Welcome back, Starkscan.
This time, easier to read for humans, and above all, built for the agentic world.
It brings together an explorer, an API surface, and an agent workflow layer for Starknet. All in one place.
Structured for agents. Readable for humans.
Starkscan is a new explorer and data API for @Starknet.
Look up transactions in the UI, or pull clean, decoded data from the API and CLI.
🧵
