I agree with @chrisdotsol here.
more broadly, @SolanaFndn has been turning a blind eye to some of the ecosystem’s most pressing issues, from MEV, sandwiching, “centralisation cabal” and value extraction to what we’re seeing now. Using controversy to “maximise engagement” without considering the downstream impact on the ecosystem, its builders, and retail users is incredibly short sighted.
If the Foundation is serious about improving Solana, it should start by addressing the problems closer to home, taking accountability for what has happened, and focusing on the structural issues that continue to undermine trust in the ecosystem.
As before I’ll continue to give you stats/data/proofs it’ll be up-to the community to decide what and who to put their trust in.
more broadly, @SolanaFndn has been turning a blind eye to some of the ecosystem’s most pressing issues, from MEV, sandwiching, “centralisation cabal” and value extraction to what we’re seeing now. Using controversy to “maximise engagement” without considering the downstream impact on the ecosystem, its builders, and retail users is incredibly short sighted.
If the Foundation is serious about improving Solana, it should start by addressing the problems closer to home, taking accountability for what has happened, and focusing on the structural issues that continue to undermine trust in the ecosystem.
As before I’ll continue to give you stats/data/proofs it’ll be up-to the community to decide what and who to put their trust in.
If you work at Solana Foundation or Labs, I hope at least some of you are embarrassed by what’s going on.
I understand why people with jobs, careers and compensation tied up in Solana might not want to say anything publicly.
But I also hope there are people inside who can see badly wrong with the leadership and the culture around it, and who are privately rooting for the people willing to ask uncomfortable questions.
4
3
105
7,838
100 pct agreed.
If you work at Solana Foundation or Labs, I hope at least some of you are embarrassed by what’s going on.
I understand why people with jobs, careers and compensation tied up in Solana might not want to say anything publicly.
But I also hope there are people inside who can see that something has gone badly wrong with the leadership and the culture around it, and who are privately rooting for the people willing to ask uncomfortable questions.
1
0
3
136
one word: cabal
Nothing to see here.
Just the official Solana account reposting 3x leverage on $ANSEM through Phoenix.
The company behind Phoenix is backed by Toly and Anagram, co-founded by Solana Foundation president Lily Liu.
$ANSEM is down ~80% since the RT.
Which brings me to something t.
When I worked at Solana Foundation on content, we had a very strict rule that we didn’t tweet token tickers. We were incredibly careful about this stuff. We wouldn’t even promote SOL, let alone a KOL's memecoin on leverage.
That simply wasn’t something we were allowed to do.
So who changed the rules?
When did they change? Why did they change? And on what basis was it decided that this is now an acceptable use of the official Solana account?
0
0
7
425
8bit0 🏴☠️ retweeted
Crypto needs to become a positive-sum game.
We cannot keep building an ecosystem where value is created by extracting it from someone else.
The ecosystem/chain needs to move beyond zero-sum speculation and short-term value extraction towards an economy where capital formation, productive liquidity, and real economic activity create value for the entire ecosystem.
The goal should be to expand the pie, not just redistribute it.
We cannot keep building an ecosystem where value is created by extracting it from someone else.
The ecosystem/chain needs to move beyond zero-sum speculation and short-term value extraction towards an economy where capital formation, productive liquidity, and real economic activity create value for the entire ecosystem.
The goal should be to expand the pie, not just redistribute it.
0
2
15
557
Crypto needs to become a positive-sum game.
We cannot keep building an ecosystem where value is created by extracting it from someone else.
The ecosystem/chain needs to move beyond zero-sum speculation and short-term value extraction towards an economy where capital formation, productive liquidity, and real economic activity create value for the entire ecosystem.
The goal should be to expand the pie, not just redistribute it.
We cannot keep building an ecosystem where value is created by extracting it from someone else.
The ecosystem/chain needs to move beyond zero-sum speculation and short-term value extraction towards an economy where capital formation, productive liquidity, and real economic activity create value for the entire ecosystem.
The goal should be to expand the pie, not just redistribute it.
0
2
15
557
It's not new knowledge that apparently some providers and builders are now working with extractive actors on chain, risking the reputation of the chain itself.
Imho they'll continue to do so and are not going to stop anytime soon as they're backed by people from foundation.
Only thing that you can do is to not use them, that's all.
Imho they'll continue to do so and are not going to stop anytime soon as they're backed by people from foundation.
Only thing that you can do is to not use them, that's all.
Atomic Arb is not a substitute for good routing
User lost 50.11 SOL to poor routing
Mriya captured 40.1 SOL arb profit
Even if 100% of that is rebated to the user (unlikely), they're still out 10 SOL
If it turns out apps themselves profit from this, their incentives are The worse the execution, the more the atomic arb profit.
2
0
28
1,396
8bit0 🏴☠️ retweeted
Atomic Arb is not a substitute for good routing
User lost 50.11 SOL to poor routing
Mriya captured 40.1 SOL arb profit
Even if 100% of that is rebated to the user (unlikely), they're still out 10 SOL
If it turns out apps themselves profit from this, their incentives are The worse the execution, the more the atomic arb profit.
User lost 50.11 SOL to poor routing
Mriya captured 40.1 SOL arb profit
Even if 100% of that is rebated to the user (unlikely), they're still out 10 SOL
If it turns out apps themselves profit from this, their incentives are The worse the execution, the more the atomic arb profit.
12
8
69
9,003
Deleting the above, I crunched more data to build a more coherent argument. Linked here:
x.com/eightbitsim/st…
x.com/eightbitsim/st…
1/ @MostlyData_ respect your work a lot, nothing personal. “wide sandwich” has no proper definition, so let’s use your term, momentum trading. only question left, is it toxic for people trading on @solana?
0
0
1
121
1/ @MostlyData_ respect your work a lot, nothing personal. “wide sandwich” has no proper definition, so let’s use your term, momentum trading. only question left, is it toxic for people trading on @solana?
1/8 There are rumors of a new kind of sandwich on Solana.
However, a sandwich needs one thing: knowing your trade before it lands.
We looked at the on-chain data and found no sign of that. What we see is a momentum bet.
👇🧵
3
1
29
1,645
4/ and it’s just one builder. normal users land right behind a same-token buy ~20% of the time everywhere. the bot: 78% on that builder, 36% on jito/BAM, 19% elsewhere. all 22 wallets, and it pays ~11× more fee on those slots
1
0
5
272
5/ there’s no public mempool, so before a tx lands only the leader’s TPU and the builder can see it. 1-2 positions is under a ms of block time, way too fast to watch it land and react. e.g. slot 457634942, trigger paid 0.00008 SOL fee, bot paid 0.0315 and sat right behind it
i
solscan.io/tx/41HWJovA6zo…
i
solscan.io/tx/41HWJovA6zo…
0
0
7
257
1/ @coinbase runs 6 Solana validators. 5 use the same block builder, 1 doesn’t. Look at the difference.
SOL taken by front-running bots per 1k leader slots, Sep 27-Oct 18:
Coinbase: 2.66
Coinbase 02: 2.67
Coinbase 03: 2.67
Coinbase 04 (4.2M SOL): 2.20
Coinbase 05, not on the builder: 0.42
x.com/eightbitsim/st…
SOL taken by front-running bots per 1k leader slots, Sep 27-Oct 18:
Coinbase: 2.66
Coinbase 02: 2.67
Coinbase 03: 2.67
Coinbase 04 (4.2M SOL): 2.20
Coinbase 05, not on the builder: 0.42
x.com/eightbitsim/st…
10
7
99
6,182
3/ Questions for the ETPs staking SOL with coinbase
@FTDA_US’s filing names coinbase as staking provider. @21shares_us lists it as primary. @Grayscale, is it one of yours?
Are you aware of this? Are you profiting from it?
If so, we’d hope it reaches your holders. 21Shares’ own prospectus says block rewards and transaction fees “will not accrete to the Trust.” Franklin’s Staking Rewards cover consideration “in exchange for using… the Fund’s Solana.” Builder-side revenue isn’t that.
@FTDA_US’s filing names coinbase as staking provider. @21shares_us lists it as primary. @Grayscale, is it one of yours?
Are you aware of this? Are you profiting from it?
If so, we’d hope it reaches your holders. 21Shares’ own prospectus says block rewards and transaction fees “will not accrete to the Trust.” Franklin’s Staking Rewards cover consideration “in exchange for using… the Fund’s Solana.” Builder-side revenue isn’t that.
2
1
16
685
4/ So what are your criteria for choosing a validator?
Grayscale’s filing says the Trust “has no right to direct the Staking Provider in the conduct of validation activities.”
Do your criteria include making sure it doesn’t profit from toxic flow at your holders’ expense?
cc: @CoinbaseInsto @lewisjhan @Duncanmoir @andres21co @PeterMintzberg @Krista_Lynch_ @21shares @FranklnTempletn
Grayscale’s filing says the Trust “has no right to direct the Staking Provider in the conduct of validation activities.”
Do your criteria include making sure it doesn’t profit from toxic flow at your holders’ expense?
cc: @CoinbaseInsto @lewisjhan @Duncanmoir @andres21co @PeterMintzberg @Krista_Lynch_ @21shares @FranklnTempletn
0
0
16
586
1/ I’ve received a lot of DMs asking how this mechanism works. Let’s dig into one validator, @StakingFac. Their main node started running this builder on Sep 24. Before that, no sign of this cluster on any of their slots. Its first trade came on Sep 27, three days after the switch.
cluster wallets:
drive.proton.me/urls/QX2SG6699…
cluster wallets:
drive.proton.me/urls/QX2SG6699…
6
7
89
5,590
3/ Example: slot 453633439. The cluster buys 3.0 SOL at tx 7, a 5.0 SOL buy lands at tx 8, and the cluster sells 3 slots later for +0.74 SOL. Every round, with full signatures, is in this CSV:
drive.proton.me/urls/VDBEHT5BV…
I also checked validators that switched during this window. Two that joined the builder went from 0.4× to over 2× the cluster’s normal rate. One that left dropped from 2.7× to 0.5×. The cluster follows the builder.
drive.proton.me/urls/VDBEHT5BV…
I also checked validators that switched during this window. Two that joined the builder went from 0.4× to over 2× the cluster’s normal rate. One that left dropped from 2.7× to 0.5×. The cluster follows the builder.
1
0
7
732
4/ Staking Facilities has always been a very honest operator, so this may well be a surprise to them, and it may simply have slipped under their radar. Some of my friends tell me @StakingMatthias has been promoting this builder to other validators and swears by its safety and off-chain rewards. Perhaps he can shed some light on where he believes those off-chain rewards come from?
1
1
10
721