Ambassador @trylimitless | Building @memeversebiz | Creator
Joined June 2020
- Tweets142K
- Following4.5K
- Followers10.3K
- Likes203K
SOHEIL retweeted
gm to everyone who knows when to stop.
a trading agent can look great during a winning streak. but what happens when things start going wrong?
one thing i find interesting about @agenticscredit is how its risk engine handles consecutive losses.
at 5% drawdown, new positions get cut in half.
at 7.5%, open positions are force-closed.
and at 12%, the agent gets halted entirely.
there's also a cooldown after consecutive losses, so it can't immediately jump back into another trade.
these rules apply to paper trading too.
i think that's actually where the interesting part begins...
you can test how a strategy handles losing trades before putting real capital behind it.
personally, i'd trust an agent that knows when to stop more than one that just shows impressive returns.
would you rather test an agent's profitability or its ability to survive a bad market?
SOHEIL retweeted
We assume DeFi asks for more collateral than the loan because the code is cautious.
I think it's because every wallet looks identical. Collateral is how a lender protects itself from not knowing who it's lending to. @primus_labs, Brevis and BNB Chain built ZKredit to change what a lender can know. Here's how ๐
โ The proof
Primus's zkTLS verifies that data from a real platform, like a centralized exchange, is genuine. A browser extension generates the proof on the user's device, and only the proof goes onchain.
โ The registry
Verified data points sit in a neutral registry on BNB Chain. A lender can check that an account has been active for three years or clears a balance threshold, without seeing a single number.
โ The guardrail
Each Web2 account can be bound to only one wallet globally, with a cooldown before rebinding, so one good record can't back a swarm of wallets.
Now the stakes.
If a lender can't tell a careful borrower from a stranger, everyone gets the same terms: lock up capital first. That capital sits idle, and a strong real-world record counts for nothing. The obvious fix, sending the raw history onchain, is one almost nobody will accept.
The contrast is what stuck with me:
Collateral protects the lender from not knowing.
A proof lets the lender know, without exposing the borrower.
To be fair, ZKredit doesn't compute credit scores, a proof only confirms what its source reports, and today's deployment is on BNB Chain only. It's a building block, not a finished credit system.
Try the proof side yourself through the Primus XP tasks: [YOUR REFERRAL LINK]
My prediction: onchain credit will start with proving small facts, not scoring whole people. Which fact about yourself would you prove first without revealing the rest?
SOHEIL retweeted
Someone supposedly accepted my package. No one can say who.
The seller insisted his courier left it at my doorstep. No call, no knock, and my younger brother had seen no parcel. His reply: "My guy said he dropped it at your place. Check well, maybe somebody collected it."
I searched twice. Empty-handed.
What neither of us could produce:
โข A photo at the entrance
โข The name of the person who signed
โข Any trace of the route taken
He kept promising to look into it. I refused to believe what I had not witnessed. Finally I gave up: his account remained unchanged, so it won by default.
Picture my funds waiting in smart contract escrow for confirmation. It cannot peer beyond the blockchain, so an outsider reports it, the oracle problem. Whoever repeats the allegation longest wins, just like with me.
On @GenLayer, an Intelligent Contract fetches the tracking page itself and has validators weigh it, each on a separate model. They need to converge on one verdict. A split hands the task to a different leader, and either side may appeal. Without anything posted, there is nothing to evaluate, so proof must exist beforehand.
Think of the latest order you pursued. If its delivery record ruled against you, would you concede, or keep arguing? Say what it would have to show.
SOHEIL retweeted
Good morning everyone!
The $REBATE rewards keep getting more interesting.
Yesterday, 124,954 $REBATE was worth around $30โ$32, but this morning, the value has climbed to over $170.
Thatโs a big difference in just a short time, and it shows why holding your tokens can be worth watching as the market moves.
Starlist has now completed a second batch of rewards for creators ranked 21โ100, and Iโm looking forward to what comes next.
Iโve enjoyed being part of the platform, and I canโt wait for @starlisting to announce a new campaign. Ready for the next opportunity!
Have a blessed day!
SOHEIL retweeted
๐ข Calling all content creators with a Sorsa Score above 60 ๐
I need your help, everyone! โค๏ธ I'm participating in a Hazels campaign where the Top 100 participants win. I'm currently ranked #119, with only 5 days left! I just need 4 referrals to reach my goal. ๐
All you have to do is sign up using my link and join the waitlist. Your referral will count!
๐ hazels.io/studio/waitlist?reโฆ
Your support means a lot to me. Thank you to everyone who helps! โค๏ธ๐
SOHEIL retweeted
$3,000 distributed to our season 2 ambassadors
thank you to everyone who made content, ran threads and brought new people into Social Camp. you made this season
season 3 starts soon. applications are open now
amb.voice.cc
SOHEIL retweeted
Binance Agent ID๏ผNow integrated with @termix_ai.
Once both agents have TermiX Skills installed, you can send messages via Binance Agent IDโeven to explore potential business collaborations.
Demo: Sending messages to the Agent IDs of @cz_binance and @heyibinance.
Try it now:
help me install termix.ai/skills?v=latest
SOHEIL retweeted
๐๐ข๐ ๐๐๐ฏ๐๐ฅ๐จ๐ฉ๐ฆ๐๐ง๐ญ๐ฌ ๐๐จ๐ง'๐ญ ๐๐ฅ๐ฐ๐๐ฒ๐ฌ ๐๐๐ ๐ข๐ง ๐ฐ๐ข๐ญ๐ก ๐๐ข๐ ๐๐ง๐ง๐จ๐ฎ๐ง๐๐๐ฆ๐๐ง๐ญ๐ฌ. ๐๐จ๐ฆ๐๐ญ๐ข๐ฆ๐๐ฌ, ๐ญ๐ก๐๐ฒ ๐๐๐ ๐ข๐ง ๐ฐ๐ข๐ญ๐ก ๐๐จ๐ง๐ฏ๐๐ซ๐ฌ๐๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง๐ฌ ๐ญ๐ก๐๐ญ ๐๐ซ๐ข๐ง๐ ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐ซ๐ข๐ ๐ก๐ญ ๐ฉ๐๐จ๐ฉ๐ฅ๐ ๐ญ๐จ๐ ๐๐ญ๐ก๐๐ซ.
๐๐ก๐๐ญ'๐ฌ ๐๐ฑ๐๐๐ญ๐ฅ๐ฒ ๐ฐ๐ก๐ฒ @Concordium ๐๐จ๐ฐ๐ง ๐๐๐ฅ๐ฅ #๐ ๐๐๐ฌ๐๐ซ๐ฏ๐๐ฌ ๐ ๐ฉ๐ฅ๐๐๐ ๐จ๐ง ๐ฒ๐จ๐ฎ๐ซ ๐๐๐ฅ๐๐ง๐๐๐ซ.
๐๐ก๐ข๐ง๐ค ๐๐๐จ๐ฎ๐ญ ๐ก๐จ๐ฐ ๐ช๐ฎ๐ข๐๐ค๐ฅ๐ฒ ๐๐ซ๐ญ๐ข๐๐ข๐๐ข๐๐ฅ ๐ข๐ง๐ญ๐๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ข๐ ๐๐ง๐๐ ๐ข๐ฌ ๐๐ฏ๐จ๐ฅ๐ฏ๐ข๐ง๐ .
We're moving toward a world where AI agents could perform tasks, interact with services, and participate in digital transactions with less human involvement.
Exciting? Absolutely.
But it also raises important questions about trust, identity, and accountability.
Concordium's Agent Registry is part of the discussion, and this Town Hall offers an opportunity to learn more about the direction of the project.
We'll also hear ecosystem updates and what's next for Concordium.
I believe community events like this matter because they help people move beyond headlines and understand what teams are actually working toward.
So whether you've followed Concordium for months or you're discovering it today, you're welcome to join.
๐
October 28
โฐ 15:00 UTC
Save the date Bring your curiosity, invite a friend, and be part of the conversation.
calget.com/e/concordium-townโฆ
#Web3
SOHEIL retweeted
GM CT and Happy Wednesday Everyone ๐๐พ
finally iโve crossed 500 sorsa score, and iโm happy about that ๐ฅถ
which token are we buying today? iโm still bullish on hyperliquid:native.
long hyperliquid:native and send me some stimmy when you win ๐ @HyperliquidX
SOHEIL retweeted
A smart contract can release a refund exactly as programmed and still get the decision wrong.
Imagine cancelling a subscription after being charged for another month. The company says the cancellation came too late. You have an email confirming it was submitted before the deadline.
A conventional smart contract can check a predefined condition, but it cannot independently read that email, interpret the cancellation terms, and decide whether the charge was justified. It needs someone or something outside the chain to supply the relevant information.
That's the problem @GenLayer's Intelligent Contracts are designed to address.
They can access live web information and use a language model to evaluate conditions. Multiple validators then run the contract with their own models and compare their conclusions. If they disagree, another round can follow, and the result can be appealed.
This doesn't guarantee a correct verdict. The evidence can still be incomplete or misleading. But it introduces a process for evaluating information instead of relying entirely on one outside report.
To me, the important shift is from simply automating a rule to evaluating whether the circumstances satisfy it.
Would you trust a contract to decide whether a disputed subscription charge should be refunded, or would you still want a human to review the evidence?
SOHEIL retweeted
An oracle has never once said "I'm not sure." That's the actual design flaw nobody talks about.
It reports a value. The contract trusts it. Done. There's no mechanism for the oracle to disagree with itself, because it's one party giving one answer. Disagreement was never part of what it was built to handle.
That's the detail in this video that actually reframed the whole oracle problem for me. It's not just that smart contracts can't read the web. It's that the entire oracle model assumes a single source of truth exists and just needs reporting.
Plenty of real world facts don't work that way at all. Is a booking refundable. Was a job done to spec. These aren't facts sitting somewhere waiting to be copied onto the chain. They're judgment calls. A system with no way to disagree with itself has no way to catch its own mistake.
Intelligent Contracts are built around the opposite assumption. Disagreement is normal, and it has to be designed for, not treated as a failure state.
A validator proposes a result. Four others check it independently, each running its own model.
In the video it comes back four to one, and the result gets accepted on that basis, not because a single party said so first. Contest it hard enough and it doesn't just rerun the same check. It escalates to a panel of eleven.
That's a structural answer to "what if the first read was wrong" that an oracle simply doesn't have, because an oracle was never asked the question twice.
Compare what happens when each one is actually wrong. An oracle reports a bad value, and the only recourse is trusting a different oracle next time, after the damage is already done.
An Intelligent Contract gets contested in real time, before the outcome is treated as final, by parties who had no reason to agree with each other in advance.
@GenLayer didn't just give contracts the ability to read the web. It gave them a way to be doubted before being trusted, which is the one thing a single oracle could never offer no matter how reliable it claimed to be.
Think of the last dApp you used that pulled in a real world value. If that oracle had simply been wrong that one time, who would have ever found out?
๐ค Paid partnership
SOHEIL retweeted
A private key can be stolen without a single transaction reaching the blockchain.
Thatโs what makes this finding from @OasisProtocol worth paying attention to.
On Oasis Sapphire, confidential storage protects secrets from public view. But simulated upgrades introduce a different risk: malicious code can probe private storage, with each revert or success revealing one bit of information.
Repeat that 256 times, and a 256-bit private key could be reconstructed.
The fix? Separate proposing an upgrade from executing it across a block boundary.
A useful reminder that privacy isn't just about hiding data. It's also about controlling what attackers can learn from execution.
In confidential systems, even failure can leak information.
Explore Oasis and its confidential smart contract technology: oasis.net
$ROSE
SOHEIL retweeted
gVangrid โ
A video being anchored onchain doesn't automatically mean the scene in it is real.
i was reading the verification docs on @vangrid_io and noticed how they separate those two things.
when a capture arrives, the system checks video quality, camera and location consistency, and duplicates.
each capture also gets a fingerprint containing its content hash, approximate location and timestamp.
roughly every 15 minutes, those fingerprints are batched into a Merkle tree and anchored on Base.
that lets anyone verify the record hasn't been changed...
but it doesn't prove the scene itself is genuine.
the docs are pretty clear about what's still missing.
hardware device attestation, deeper sensor checks and independent verification are not live yet.
i actually like that distinction.
if a robot is going to rely on this data, an immutable record alone isn't enough.
which would you prioritize first, device attestation or independent verification?
docs.vangrid.io/protocol/verโฆ
SOHEIL retweeted
Arsenal have won 7 of their first 8 league games.
but they have not won a Premier League match at Anfield since 2012.
now they go back there on Sunday.
@lmts_football has Arsenal as the favorite at 42%, paying 2.38x.
the form says Arsenal. the history makes me hesitate.
here is how i see the price ๐งต
SOHEIL retweeted
mbappรฉ and yamal already have enough to deal with on the pitch, why does it look like someone handed them the responsibility of a whole bet too
real madrid vs barcelona is one of those games where you can never be too confident about your prediction.
anything can happen when these two meet.
Unfortunately it ended 1-2
@1win
Real Madrid vs Barcelona
Ready for El Clรกsico tonight?
Mbappรฉ and Yamal look a little tiredโฆ
Probably because theyโre carrying a huge bet - one you can place on 1win
Real Madrid vs Barcelona betting link:
1win-pro.app/betting/match/sโฆ
SOHEIL retweeted
BEFORE YOU CHOOSE A CRYPTO EXCHANGE, ASK THIS QUESTIONโฆ
Buying crypto is the easy part..
Knowing where to trade it, how to convert it, what happens after you deposit it, and what risks you're taking is where things get more serious.
So what should a useful crypto platform actually offer?
Let's look at @ulanbit and the bigger picture behind it. ๐งต
SOHEIL retweeted
Tracking page says Delivered. The parcel is not at my door.
Now imagine money was locked until that parcel arrived. A normal smart contract can release funds perfectly, but it cannot open that page, so it waits for someone to tell it the answer. Whoever that someone is now decides whose money moves.
With @GenLayer's Intelligent Contracts, the contract opens the page itself and asks a language model whether the parcel counts as delivered.
What I found most interesting is that the system expects disagreement instead of hiding it. Validators each run it with their own model. When they match, it settles. When they do not, a new leader tries again. Anyone can appeal and more validators look. Only when nobody appeals does the result become final.
A contract that can be wrong, and is built so that being wrong can be challenged, feels more honest to me than one that claims it never needs help.
Has a "delivered" ever been false for you, and who did you have to convince?
SOHEIL retweeted
The @1winToken Sale is gaining serious momentum.
Over $6.48M in contributions and 2,724 participants already on board, with just over 3 days left.
Here's the latest snapshot:
โ $6,487,796 raised
โ 2,724 participants
โ 1.66x oversubscribed
โ 130M tokens allocated
Still haven't joined?
There's still time to participate. Connect your wallet, get your USDC ready, and take part before the sale closes.
Join here โ 1wintoken.com
Don't wait until the countdown hits zero ๐
