My Second fan art for The world of nulls This time, I brought Hatake Kakashi into the @nullsxyz universe. Another character brought to life, with a lot of attention to every detail and movement. Hopefully, when the time comes, there’s a little room for the artists who’ve been adding their own arts to the nulls universe ❤️ Hope you enjoy it! More fan art coming soon. ( proof in comments)

The data is encrypted. That's an important answer. It doesn't answer every question a financial organization has. Key management belongs in the same discussion of confidentiality A building can have a solid door while nobody knows who holds the master key how it's stored or who is responsible for access if something goes wrong. more detail about the door's thickness won't supply those answers. Financial infrastructure needs examination of the protection and how access is managed In its FHETransform explanation, Primus describes heavy computation happening offchain with coordination onchain. The KMS described for managing keys uses a secure TEE environment. The samedocs describe a move toward threshold MPC as a longer term direction The architecture presented and its future destination shouldn't be treated as identical. for someone putting sensitive financial information into a process, this isn't a side issue. They need to understand the mechanism and trust assumptions behind confidentiality. Those layers are what Id expect @primus_labs to explain. Encryption opens the discussion. Responsibility for access, storage and keeping things running needs to be understandable too. here's the link to follow participation and XP: Asking these questions doesn't necessarily accuse a system of being insecure. They're what move the phrase suitable for institutions out of a brochure and into an actual decision.

The data is encrypted. That's an important answer. It doesn't answer every question a financial organization has. Key management belongs in the same discussion of confidentiality A building can have a solid door while nobody knows who holds the master key how it's stored or who is responsible for access if something goes wrong. more detail about the door's thickness won't supply those answers. Financial infrastructure needs examination of the protection and how access is managed In its FHETransform explanation, Primus describes heavy computation happening offchain with coordination onchain. The KMS described for managing keys uses a secure TEE environment. The samedocs describe a move toward threshold MPC as a longer term direction The architecture presented and its future destination shouldn't be treated as identical. for someone putting sensitive financial information into a process, this isn't a side issue. They need to understand the mechanism and trust assumptions behind confidentiality. Those layers are what Id expect @primus_labs to explain. Encryption opens the discussion. Responsibility for access, storage and keeping things running needs to be understandable too. here's the link to follow participation and XP: Asking these questions doesn't necessarily accuse a system of being insecure. They're what move the phrase suitable for institutions out of a brochure and into an actual decision.

Suppose your wallet and the rest of your assets are on Ethereum and you want to hold tokenized silver If that one asset forces you to change your entire financial setup, the transaction fee isn't the whole cost . A new account, a transfer route, switching between environments and where you can trade all become part of the decision. those costs might not appear in a price table. They still affect the choice. STRATO's September 10 announcement about SILVST addressed that problem. The project announced that its tokenized silver could bridge to Ethereum and had a SILVST/USDC pair on Uniswap. that shouldn't be presented as today's news. Its relevance before TGE is that access to the asset doesnt have to mean staying inside one environment permanently. In that division of roles, @strato_net also aims to connect metals with financial services. GOLDST and SILVST sit alongside USDST, trading and savings The HardFi picture comes from those pieces working together rather than merely creating atoken named after a metal. One person might want to keep silver beside the rest of their Ethereum assets. another might want to use it in supported STRATO services. Their needs aren't identical even if the underlying asset is. If the chosen route involves borrowing against collateral, fees and liquidation enter the calculation. Bridging an asset doesnt remove that financial risk. Trading on Ethereum doesn't guarantee deep liquidity either . The project's explanation says moving the token between chains doesn't move the metal. the silver stays with a physical custodian. The wallet and bridge are only part of the chain of trust. The backing claim and the custody records still matter in their own right. Having SILVST on Ethereum doesn't mean every DeFi protocol accepts it as collateral. Each use needs support from that particular product Being an ERC-20 isn't a universal admission pass. What this expansion makes clearer is the user's choice about where to hold an asset and where to use it. If HardFi is going to go beyond a table of tokenized assets, it needs to narrow that gap between "i have it" and "what can I do with it"

A filing stamp on a statement doesn't prove the calculation is correct. An onchain NAV has the same boundary. You can see the published number . You still need to ask who calculated it. At @atoma_fi NAV is published onchain roughly hourly. the project says its contracts are verified on Arbiscan. The operator calculates NAV itself. That transparency doesn't remove operator venue or smartcontract risk. The current Genesis multiplier isnt the final one either. Combined TVL across the two vaults at the November 14 snapshot at 00:00 UTC determines it. Qualificationcloses at the end of November 13. The boost applies only to Atoma Points through the end of december 7, not to returns. Points aren't a promise of a return. Check the current number and qualifying balance here. Then keep the snapshot date in mind:

Getting paid for services doesn't automatically give a token holder a right to receive that money. the Q3 update from @turtledotxyz reports $1.04M across Turtle and Lunar Strategy, on a cash in basis and net of intercompany. That's revenue from commercial work in servicesand distribution. The same update describes Turtle's token as the single instrument tied to coordination access Utility concerns what access it provides, not an automatic distribution of reported revenue to holders. More work on the network makes coordination a more relevant question. A holder's actual rights still have to come from the mechanism, rather than an assumption made from a revenue figure. read the token section with that distinction in mind . What does access mean and which rights havent been promised?

Sometimes you just love some of your articles more than others and this was one of those! I even fell in love with the poster😁 I know people don't pay much attention to these details these days but I personally love it when a poster truly serves the concept and message of the article😉

the clarity act, that big crypto market structure bill, is basically on life support right now. after the senate cloture vote failed in september and the midterms flipped both chambers, traders on @polymarket have the chance of it actually becoming law before the end of 2026 sitting at just 2% more than 25 million dollars has already moved through the market and almost all of it is on the no side. the lame duck session is technically still open but nobody seems to think the votes are there anymore. the house already passed it last year, yet the whole thing just stalled, and the crowd is treating 2026 as a closed door.

You can get the market direction right and still spend part of the result on entering and holding the position before you close it . Entry and exit prices alone don't tell the whole story. Suppose you want to execute a larger order If there aren't enough orders near your intended price, part of the purchase fills at a worse price. you might not see that cost in a trading fee column. You see it in your execution price. Then theres holding the position. In perps, funding helps keep the contract close to its reference market. Depending on conditions, longs or shorts pay the other side or receive payment. Funding isn't always money you pay out but it belongs in the trade's result. when settlement happens every 1, 4 or 8 hours, holding a position longer means keeping track of those rounds and their rates too . Stable Funding Perps from @grvt_io is planned around a different schedule: one charge per weekday, at market close. That makes the settlement schedule clearer It doesn't automatically make the funding amount fixed or lower. weekend costs haven't magically disappeared either. The slides explain that they're rolled into a triple charge: Wednesday for metalsand Friday for energy. No weekend charges isn't the same as a free weekend. On execution, Grvt describes live quotes from market makers who hedge in traditional markets. That matters to the discussion of depth and slippage. A larger orders execution shouldn't be judged by the fee number alone. the introduction also states zero trading fees and no spread added by Grvt itself. Neither means all costs disappear or that every order size is guaranteed to fill at one price. The product is still described as coming soon. To set up your account now😉 for a position you hold longer, put the timing and amount of funding alongside the actual execution prices when entering and exiting. You'll see the trading cost more completely, while remembering that perpetual futures trading itself still carries risk

You can get the market direction right and still spend part of the result on entering and holding the position before you close it . Entry and exit prices alone don't tell the whole story. Suppose you want to execute a larger order If there aren't enough orders near your intended price, part of the purchase fills at a worse price. you might not see that cost in a trading fee column. You see it in your execution price. Then theres holding the position. In perps, funding helps keep the contract close to its reference market. Depending on conditions, longs or shorts pay the other side or receive payment. Funding isn't always money you pay out but it belongs in the trade's result. when settlement happens every 1, 4 or 8 hours, holding a position longer means keeping track of those rounds and their rates too . Stable Funding Perps from @grvt_io is planned around a different schedule: one charge per weekday, at market close. That makes the settlement schedule clearer It doesn't automatically make the funding amount fixed or lower. weekend costs haven't magically disappeared either. The slides explain that they're rolled into a triple charge: Wednesday for metalsand Friday for energy. No weekend charges isn't the same as a free weekend. On execution, Grvt describes live quotes from market makers who hedge in traditional markets. That matters to the discussion of depth and slippage. A larger orders execution shouldn't be judged by the fee number alone. the introduction also states zero trading fees and no spread added by Grvt itself. Neither means all costs disappear or that every order size is guaranteed to fill at one price. The product is still described as coming soon. To set up your account now😉 for a position you hold longer, put the timing and amount of funding alongside the actual execution prices when entering and exiting. You'll see the trading cost more completely, while remembering that perpetual futures trading itself still carries risk

Watching $ETH bounce around the low 2000 and the crowd on @polymarket has suddenly priced a dip to 2000 at 91% with the whole ladder sitting on nearly 20 million in volume so far. the 1750 level only sits at 36% while anything above 3000 is stuck under 10% and i keep wondering if the recent jump in the downside odds is just short term fear or if people are quietly bracing for eth to keep grinding lower into the end of the year.

been watching the cryptopunks NFT floor sit around 28 $ETH lately and the crowd on @polymarket is putting just 9% odds on it dropping to 20 ETH OR lower before 2027 with only about 16k in volume so far while the upside to 50 eth is stuck at 6% with blur shutting its frontend in a few days liquidity for these blue chips feels thinner than ever and i keep wondering if the quiet volume means people have already priced in more stagnation or if a sudden liquidity event could still shove the floor either way before year end