Luke Mulks 🦁⟁◎⟁

Our intent with introducing /go/ links was to reduce unwanted bot traffic that was worsening the search experience for real users. We're proud to have accomplished this in a way that still preserves the privacy and convenience of our search engine. brave.com/blog/google-goto-a…

To stop scrapers on Brave Search, we introduced a privacy-preserving URL cloaking service inspired by Google's own GOTO redirect. Unlike Google's redirects, however, our service prevents us from learning which result you clicked on. Here's how it works...

*JENSEN HUANG CLAIMS HE IS IN EPSTEIN FILES IN ATTEMPT TO THWART ANY FURTHER INVESTIGATION - AP.

We've derisked quite a bit. After derisking higher we kept re-adding. That has completely stopped. This isn't purely an alpha based call. I don't have a good read on the market, we're up a lot into year end and want to crystallize gains, and I'm worried about what's coming. Short term, crypto may be uninvestable. Democrats are probably going Gensler 2.0. There are plenty of nasty outcomes: - DATs made illegal and forced to unwind -Warren Banking Oversight - Protocols pushing memecoins getting prosecuted - Privacy tokens treated as hostile Mid to long term, this is obviously a net good for Bitcoin. Democrats will likely accelerate spending and fiat debasement, and the industry may come out better once it gets "cleaned up." Expect a tremendous amount of volatility. It will present incredible buying opportunities. Note: The democrats cannot replace the CFTC chair who has been ruling favorably for stock perps and DeFi generally, so some assets may not be totally evisercated.

ethereum:0x0d8775f648430679a709e98d2b0cb6250d2887ef How many projects in crypto have been doing weekly calls consistently without fail?

entire cycle the guy who bought zcash at $50 will look at you with a straight face and be like “buy bro it’s going to 10k” “why?” “im bullish on privacy” if its truly over i will not weep, i will rejoice for no longer need to suffer through this any more

Cuando comencé en el ecosistema hace algunos años, un navegador se hizo parte de mi día a día en el ecosistema. Hoy ese navegador llamado @brave y su proyecto estandarte Basic @AttentionToken son uno de los protagonistas de la última edición de @btctechnomag! ¡Que gratificante es construir! Privacidad 4.0

Don't let fear blind you now.

BREAKING: Water is wet. Of course the woman who wanted to recruit an “anti-crypto army” is unwilling to acknowledge the many positive things digital assets have done for affordability and everyday Americans, so allow me to name a few: -Payroll processing takes 5 days on average today, as you can see below. Stablecoins permit employers to pay their employees nearly instantly. For most Americans living paycheck-to-paycheck, getting paid 5 days earlier is a big deal. -Warren’s beloved big banks charge nearly 15% to send $200 overseas, and the money takes days or weeks to arrive. Digital assets spare its customers many of the unnecessary fees and can move the funds nearly instantly, any day of the week. For someone who claims to champion affordability and hates junk fees, she sure loves protecting them. Ultimately, digital assets have made a clear case, but she just keeps voting against them and the rules of the road she claims she wants, because she actually wants to kill crypto. Builders should plan accordingly.

If your wallet of choice isn’t @ambire and it runs Ledger’s latest signing kit, chances are every signature you make gets reported back to Ledger. I noticed it early while bumping Ledger packages to debug an issue! No affected version ever reached Аmbire production, and we’re shipping it disabled by default, with an opt-in toggle in the privacy settings 🛡️ However, the devil was that it was sneakily enabled by default in the Ledger SDK since their ledgerhq/context-module v1.16... So right after the lib update - every transaction you sign with a Ledger device started sending to blind-signing.api.ledger.com the network, the contract or recipient address, device model and firmware, app versions and whether you signed blind. I'd argue that privacy should be the default, @Ledger 💪 Happy to see more and more people becoming aware of the privacy implications and picking Ambire for our ongoing privacy focus. Catching things like this 👀 is part of the job for us!

$BAT officially hit over 100K holders on @Solana! And over 420K holders still on Ethereum as well.

Gen AI website traffic share update – October 2026 🗓️ 12 months ago (November 2025): ChatGPT: 69.5% Gemini: 15.9% DeepSeek: 4.1% Grok: 3.3% Perplexity: 2.2% Claude: 2.1% Copilot: 2.0% 🗓️ 6 months ago (April 2026): ChatGPT: 53.7% Gemini: 26.7% Claude: 8.0% DeepSeek: 4.0% Grok: 3.2% Copilot: 2.0% Perplexity: 1.5% 🗓️ 3 months ago (August 2026): ChatGPT: 55.6% Gemini: 25.6% Claude: 9.3% DeepSeek: 3.5% Grok: 2.5% Copilot: 1.6% Perplexity: 0.9% 🗓️ 2 month ago (September 2026): ChatGPT: 56.4% Gemini: 25.0% Claude: 9.6% DeepSeek: 3.4% Grok: 2.3% Copilot: 1.5% Perplexity: 0.9% 🗓️ 1 month ago (October 2026): ChatGPT: 55.7% Gemini: 24.2% Claude: 11.5% DeepSeek: 3.4% Grok: 2.2% Copilot: 1.1% Perplexity: 0.8%

Wow, found a rare interview of a Megaspeed cofounder — who worked with alleged Chinese spy Alice Huang to smuggle Nvidia chips — talking about his first AI startup exit a few years ago.

I'm increasingly despondent about how binary the AI debate has become in the US. Either you're naively pro-AI, happy to see massive data center build-out and a handful of frontier model companies become central to everything we do online, or you want to pause research, stop the build-out, and discourage people from using AI. Almost nowhere do I see people talking about the need for decentralized AI. To me, this is the only safe way forward. There's an underlying truth to both sides of the naive debate. The pro-AI camp is right that refusing these technologies leaves enormous consumer welfare gains on the table. An individual using an AI agent to interact with companies and governments can stand up for their own interests rather than accept whatever terms or bureaucracy they're offered without a practical means of negotiating. And refusing to advance AI research would have enormous national security and competitiveness consequences as adversaries develop technologies that could exploit our increasingly vulnerable infrastructure. The anti-AI camp is right that a world where everyone uses the same handful of inference providers for their most intimate affairs rapidly looks like a corporate panopticon. Ask yourself whether you really want every self-driving car to have a corporate kill switch. Sure, we could just regulate and trust giant inference providers, as we've done with Big Tech companies like Google. But the stakes are much higher when these companies sit at the center of virtually all our computing, and increasingly our physical infrastructure. Email and cloud storage were just the beginning. Both of these positions can be true. And their synthesis points toward a third way. We should be supercharging AI development and adoption while encouraging sovereign AI: systems in which individuals have meaningful control over the models, data, and infrastructure providing their inference. An important distinction is between training models and providing inference. Frontier training may require enormous concentrations of capital, energy, and compute. That doesn't mean the companies that train models must also control how people use them. Even the most capable models should be runnable independently of their creators. People should be able to keep their data locally and run models on hardware they control whenever feasible, especially where independence matters for safety, as with self-driving cars and home security systems. They should have access to open-weight models they can inspect, modify, and run without anyone's permission. Where cloud computing is necessary, we need genuine competition among providers that respect user privacy and autonomy. But competition isn't enough. We should develop technical and protocol-based guarantees that limit what even a dominant provider can learn about or do to its users. Technologies pioneered in cryptocurrency could play a significant role. Zero-knowledge proofs could help verify that computations were performed correctly; homomorphic encryption could enable computing on encrypted user data without revealing it to providers; and blockchain-based protocols could coordinate decentralized computing resources and enable new forms of user ownership. These technologies are at different stages of maturity, but point toward privacy and user control guaranteed by system architecture rather than a company's privacy policy. Perhaps users could even own part of the infrastructure providing their inference, sharing in its value rather than merely providing valuable data to someone else's business. There's no reason AI's enormous promise should require surrendering control over our digital lives to a handful of corporations. We can have rapid AI progress and individual technological sovereignty. Indeed, I think the latter is essential if we want the former to be a lasting benefit to humanity.

Hang 'em all -- I see some trying to blame others and excuse POTUS as if buck doesn't stop there, but they all stink. One dollar one vote means rule by Oligarchs, as I told Lex Fridman.

logging on to LinkedIn and commenting "who gives a shit" on every post

¡Atención a toda nuestra comunidad de habla hispana y LATAM! 🦁 Recientemente colaboramos con @btctechnomag, una revista digital e impresa enfocada en Web3, activos digitales y tecnología en Latinoamérica. ¡Su 8.ª edición, DEVELOPING, cuenta con la participación de @lukemulks de @brave, quien nos habla sobre el $BAT Roadmap 4.0! 🚀