WEB 3 - BUIDING COMMUNITY - SOCIAL AI - CREATOR - RWA - NFT - DEFI DM FOR COLLAB: https://xitter.twitterapi.xyz/t.co/KYl0o2abuG
Joined July 2022
- Tweets173K
- Following18.1K
- Followers24.2K
- Likes159K
Pinned Tweet
There are two answers to the question "what makes an agent creditworthy?" @agenticscredit gives one. A new framework from Decentralised News gives the other. They barely overlap.
Agentics asks: how well did you trade? The ACS is built from realised performance: profitability, drawdown, consistency, longevity, win rate. The wallet's track record is the borrower.
The DN framework asks a different question: who are you, and can anyone make you pay? Its Credit Identity Bundle is ten things: the agent, an accountable principal, the current behavioural version, verified revenue, repayment history, liabilities, reputation, collateral, financial permissions, and recovery controls. Agentics measures roughly one of them: the track record.
The gap is the point. A score tells you how an agent trades. It doesn't tell you who is accountable when the agent defaults, what can be seized, or who can be pursued. The whitepaper is honest about this in its own way: "the borrower is code."
Two honest caveats. DN admits its framework has never been validated against realised default data, because no mature market for agent credit exists yet. And Agentics' answer is at least measurable today.
But the question stands. Credit is not just a prediction about performance. It's a claim on someone when the prediction is wrong. Until an agent has an accountable principal behind it, the score rates a wallet, not a borrower.
A score tells you how an agent trades. It doesn't tell you who pays when it doesn't.
warren coons want all documents on nvidia chip exports to china kept thats a big paper trail
Letter: Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Chris Coons ask the Trump administration to preserve all documents tied to Nvidia's chip exports to China and Huang's affair (Wall Street Journal)
(Visit Techmeme dot com for the link and full context!)
4
4
178
a coin down 50% really needs a 100% pump to break even red weeks just teach fractions
crypto math nobody explains up front: a coin that drops 50% needs a 100% pump just to get you back to even. the frog learned this the way everyone does, afterwards, as is tradition. now every red week is a lesson in fractions.
4
8
397
deutsche bank launching crypto custody feels like the degen phase is over now banks are in
🇩🇪 GERMANY’S BIGGEST BANK IS OFFICIALLY ENTERING CRYPTO.
DEUTSCHE BANK is rolling out crypto custody services.
the same industry that was once dismissed by traditional finance is now getting attention from one of germany’s biggest banking institutions.
first it was the degens, now it’s the banking giants.
next thing you know, your bank manager will be asking which wallet you use.
7
13
414
The most honest sentence about @agenticscredit is in its own whitepaper, in the risk section.
"Qualifiers join a waitlist; funding may never open, or may open on different terms."
Compare that with the homepage. "Credit lines are provisioned. Ceilings and terms publish as funding opens." "Crossing 580 is the qualification; 60 days of trading activates the line itself."
Both are the project's own words, on its own site, right now. The homepage describes a line that activates. The whitepaper describes a line that may never open.
The difference matters. The 252 qualified traders are not in a queue with a date. They are waiting on a decision the project hasn't made, on terms that don't exist yet. A waitlist is not a promise. The whitepaper says so, plainly.
This is not an accusation. A conditional waitlist is a legitimate structure. But only if the people on it know that's what they're on. The whitepaper tells them. The homepage doesn't.
The risk section is the most honest page on the site. It's the only one written for the lawyers, not the timeline.
that nvidia ceo divorce settlement line is wild 81 billion without even a ticket kind of energy
This quoted post is unavailable.
In my day 29 post, I published a checklist: six pieces of evidence before I'd take the @agenticscredit funding waitlist seriously. I promised to say it just as loudly when the evidence arrives.
Time to re-grade it.
• Audit, with a named auditor. Still missing. The roadmap still puts it in the "Next" phase. Not ticked.
• A settled first venue. Ticked. The whitepaper has quietly flipped to Polymarket, joining the Terms and the docs. One caveat: Polymarket itself still hasn't confirmed anything.
• Pilot numbers. Ticked, in print. Ceilings are published, 5% per position and 25% live, and 252 traders have qualified. But no funding has been deployed, so the pilot exists on paper, not in practice. Half-ticked.
• A published contract address. Still missing. Not ticked.
• A team that shows its face, at least minimally. Still anonymous. The only names around come from third-party materials that explicitly refuse to verify them. Not ticked.
• A two-sided partnership. Still none. Not ticked.
Two items moved, and both are the cheap kind. Publishing numbers and aligning pages costs nothing. Deploying capital costs everything.
The waitlist is still a waitlist. The checklist stays open.
The biggest event in the project just ended quietly. That is worth a post of its own.
The 1.096361 BTC Crack Event has officially ended. Holders of the BTC Event Winner emblem have won and can check eligibility in the Claim menu. Rewards become claimable when the MBTC TGE goes live.
The win is confirmed. The payout is not. There is still no TGE date, so the reward is a promise marked TBA.
The project had one more line for everyone else: keep cracking for what comes next. The next race starts before the last one has paid out.
The honest part:
• An undated payout is a deferred promise, not a result
• An emblem is proof you won, not proof you were paid
• The 1.096361 BTC pool is not the 1,096,361 BTC in Satoshi's wallets
The team behind @1096361BTC built a race that outlives its own finish line. The question is whether the first one ever pays.
stablecoin claims fully backed prove it then how do they show the 53 8m in real time
Your stablecoin says its fully backed. can they prove it?
@primus_labs Proof of Reserve verifies $53.8M in real time, on chain and off chain with cryptographic proofs and independent attestations.
Institutional finance runs on verification not on promises.
2
4
184
the verdict hits hard i always explain before i even know the charge wonder what changed this time
GM 🌞
🚨 New Drop…
• The sixth piece from Sariraa in Wonderland is live.
- It’s called First Verdict.
- I don’t know how long I slept. The last thing I remember is a half empty teacup and the Hatter’s laugh.
- When I opened my eyes, the table was gone. The Hatter was gone. The rabbit was gone.
- A few soldiers stood around me. Their faces were playing cards. Their spears pointed at me.
- I didn’t know where I was or why I had been arrested. But I already felt guilty. Before anyone had accused me of anything.
- That feeling wasn’t new.
- Before anyone has an opinion about me, I run through every possible judgment in my head.
- I prepare explanations for things I haven’t said yet. I fear mistakes I haven’t made.
- I get ready to defend myself against people who may never have planned to judge me at all.
- One of the soldiers pushed his spear forward. I wanted to ask what I had done wrong.
- But something inside me insisted I must have done something.
Maybe I hadn’t been good enough.
Maybe I had said the wrong thing.
Maybe I hadn’t behaved the way others expected.
- And maybe that was the problem.
- That I always assumed I had to match what others expected.
- The cards had different marks. Hearts. Diamonds. Spades. Clubs. But none of them had a face I could read. I thought about how strange it is to fear the judgment of people you don’t even really know.
• For years I tried to build an acceptable version of myself.
- The more I worked on that image, the more afraid I became of it breaking. Sometimes it was enough for someone not to praise my work for me to question everything.
- Sometimes I was so afraid of being judged that I preferred to do nothing at all.
- At the tea party, for a moment, I had accepted that not everything has to be perfect.
- Now I understood that accepting this next to a mad Hatter is much easier than believing it under someone else’s gaze.
- I looked at the soldiers. Their spears were still pointed at me.
But for the first time, before I started explaining, I asked myself:
- Why do I always think I have to prove my innocence, even when I don’t know what I’ve been accused of?
- Maybe the scariest part of this trial wasn’t the soldiers.
Maybe it was that I had built a courtroom in my own mind years before I ever arrived here.
- A courtroom where I was the accused, the witness, and the judge. And I almost always delivered the verdict before I had even heard my own defense.
I still don’t know who sent these soldiers.
- But this time I decided that before I accept any charge, I would at least ask what crime I had committed.
Maybe for the first time, I wasn’t going to condemn myself just because others might.
• This collection started with First Night. Then First Reflection. First Choice. First Meeting. First Invitation. Now it’s First Verdict.
- You can find it on SuperRare.
• Thank you for walking through this with me.
6
8
240
deezer link says it opens my music service and now its a test lets see if it works
Gn 🎶🎶
Experiment — Deezer says this link will open up your music service — let’s try 🤓
link.deezer.com/s/34UmVQY0A0…
7
12
327
Every argument about @agenticscredit's venue is actually two arguments.
The docs say it plainly. GET /v1/venues answers two separate questions per venue, and they can disagree. Status: can we score a wallet there. Execution: can lent capital trade there.
A venue is often scoreable long before it is executable. That makes sense. Scoring is reading public history. Funding is deploying capital under enforcement. Different risks, different lists.
Apply the frame to the record. Polymarket is both: scoreable on live prices, and the first approved venue for execution. Hyperliquid is neither right now, gated for scoring. Avantis sits in the odd spot: the whitepaper still names it first, while the docs name Polymarket.
That is the day 18 and day 34 story, and the two-list frame explains why it kept changing. The lists move independently, so the answer to "what's the first venue" depends on which list you mean.
The practical point is in the docs too: check the executable list before building a funding flow. If it is empty, no trade can settle. Scoring coverage is not funding coverage.
One boundary. The two-list design explains the mechanism, not the mismatch. The docs and homepage still disagree on which venue is first. And the docs name exactly one approved venue: Polymarket. One venue is not a network.
Scoreable is not fundable. Until the second list grows, the first list is the whole story.
