Account abstraction is usually framed as better wallet UX. To me, the more interesting part is adaptability . Quantum computing and new mathematical discoveries, potentially accelerated by AI, could expose weaknesses in today’s cryptography. The question isn’t just is this secure today? but how can it adapt if the assumptions change? Starknet’s programmable accounts let developers introduce new signature methods without a network-wide upgrade. That’s a practical example of cryptographic agility: being able to adopt new cryptography as security requirements evolve. But account-level flexibility isn’t the whole picture. As an Ethereum L2, parts of Starknet’s wider security architecture still depend on Ethereum’s cryptography and migration timeline. That’s the security rationale behind exploring an independent L1: greater control over core security upgrades and how quickly they happen. Not a claim that every future threat is already solved. A focus on having the flexibility to respond. @Starknet

Happy Tuesday my bros. I keep thinking physical AI is missing something basic: robots can reason, but they still don’t really know the world around them. @vangrid_io is one of the more interesting answers I’ve seen. You capture real places with your phone, the data becomes verifiable spatial ground truth, and buyers can post USDC bounties on Base for the captures they need. No warehouse rig can map every street, loading dock, or apartment hallway. But billions of phones already walk through them every day. Robots need models. They also need to see reality.

The same quantum hardware that could break today’s cryptography is also the hardware @quipnetwork is organizing. That’s the part I find interesting. Most people frame quantum computing as a future security problem. But if machines eventually get powerful enough to threaten ECDSA, the networks that coordinate that hardware need to be secure against it too. Quip is approaching it from both sides: 🔹 A marketplace for real quantum and classical compute 🔹 Post-quantum protection for assets on chains people already use 🔹 Hash-based signatures layered into existing wallets instead of forcing everyone to migrate overnight Waiting until a quantum threat is live feels risky. Attackers can collect public keys today and decrypt or forge later. A protocol that pays quantum operators should probably assume those operators may one day have machines capable of breaking classical crypto.

gQuip CT. What stands out to me about @quipnetwork is the focus on making quantum compute useful, not just available. Developers earn royalties when jobs use their solvers. CPUs, GPUs, ASICs, and quantum processors compete on the same workloads. Idle machines get paying work. That creates a clearer loop: reward the builders, measure actual results, and put unused capacity to work. Add one interface across hardware and post-quantum protection without moving assets off existing networks, and the bigger picture starts to click. Less friction to use the technology. More reasons to contribute.

Can crypto infrastructure stay secure when the threats of tomorrow are impossible to predict? Quantum computing is advancing. Future mathematical discoveries , possibly accelerated by AI , could challenge cryptography we rely on today. Preparing is not about claiming one cryptographic scheme will win forever. It means building with strong cryptographic foundations and the ability to change security methods when needed. @Starknet takes that approach in two ways: ➥ Hash-based STARK proofs rely on hash functions rather than the elliptic-curve assumptions targeted by Shor’s algorithm. That gives Starknet a strong proving foundation that does not need to be replaced as part of its post-quantum migration. ➥ Programmable accounts define their own signature checks. A new account implementation can adopt a post-quantum verifier without forcing a protocol-wide hard fork. The migration work is ongoing. But the direction matters: build infrastructure that can adapt as computing, mathematics, and security requirements evolve. That is how crypto prepares for breakthroughs it cannot predict.

gZeru fellas. Everyone talks about finding the next airdrop. Few people check whether the trades they already made are the reason they qualify. That’s what made me try Zaps by @zerufinance . I connected the wallets I already use, and instead of starting from zero, Zaps recognized my past onchain activity with a starting Zaps balance and Trader Score. The bigger idea is ActivityFi: ZeruAI is building Activity Markets where meme launches can emerge from proof-of-activity in existing onchain communities, with verified contributors earning miner or creator rights. There’s also a live reason to check now: the $50K ZeruAI × Ditto Trading Competition runs through October 29, with 600 paid spots. Join on Zaps, trade through your Ditto link, and track your rank from verified activity. Your wallet history may already be doing more than you think. Connect your trading wallet and check your Zaps: https://t.co/nEoPwRceFo It’s the same shift @quipnetwork is making with compute: define the job, reward, deadline, and verification rules first , not the machine. A CPU, GPU, ASIC, or quantum processor can compete for the same order, but only valid, verified results get paid. The job matters more than the hardware.

A buyback means nothing if the tokens end up sitting in a treasury. Grvt just completed its first buyback: 1.1M $GRVT bought on the open market and burned , close to 1% of circulating supply. Not locked. Not treasury. Permanently removed and verifiable on-chain. But the bigger signal is timing: this is milestone one of five before Grvt 2.0 . They’re building toward one self-custodial balance that can: ➛ Earn from tokenized fixed-income assets ➛ Trade crypto, stocks, FX, commodities and indices ➛ Use that same earning balance as trading margin That last part is the real unlock. Your money doesn’t have to choose between sitting idle and being ready to trade. A buyback is easy to copy. A product loop where yield, trading and self-custody reinforce each other is harder. Grvt is trying to build the second one. $GRVT @grvt_io

gVangrid x fam. Your phone can do more than consume AI-generated content. With @vangrid_io , it can help collect the real-world data that physical AI needs. That’s the angle I find interesting: turning smartphones into a distributed network for capturing ground-level 3D data on demand, with onchain provenance so those captures can be traced. The explorer snapshot shows: → 1,351,526 captures → 464,283 active nodes → 675,025 USDC settled[1] This isn’t just a roadmap. People can already contribute through their phones, with network activity available for anyone to check. That coordination idea also makes @quipnetwork worth watching, although it tackles a different problem: pooling quantum resources. Its proposed pools would share work and rewards based on contributed effort, using circuit cutting to split larger problems across devices where practical. Longer term, the design aims to connect quantum processors through entanglement, with roles for operators supplying connectivity ,not just compute.

gQuip builders. I like how @quipnetwork is approaching early participation , it’s not just another points farm. You earn QP by holding value in a Quip account, swapping on QuipSwap, running a node, or bringing in new users. QP then convert to $QUIP at TGE based on your leaderboard position. What stands out is that it rewards real participation: securing assets, providing liquidity, running infrastructure, and growing the network. Plus, Quip accounts add post-quantum protection to assets you already hold on chains like Ethereum, Solana, and Bitcoin. Worth watching: https://t.co/sjHK20db9p

Nearly 1% of GRVT's supply just went up in smoke , and that's exactly the point. @grvt_io completed its first buyback: 1.1M GRVT bought on the open market and permanently burned. Gone forever. Not parked in a treasury, not recoverable by anyone, not even Grvt. A treasury can be re-circulated later , a burn can't. That's the difference between a promise and a permanent change onchain. Even better: it's all verifiable. Buybacks are intended to run monthly, at the issuer's discretion, executed by an independent partner , and a public dashboard tracks every round: GRVT bought, share of supply burned, cumulative burns, even the transaction hashes. Don't trust, verify. And this is only announcement 1 of 5 on the road to Grvt 2.0. What's coming: → Grvt Earn (late Oct) , tokenized fixed income targeting up to 11% yield (not guaranteed) → Stable Funding Perps (Nov), stocks, FX, commodities, indices. Zero trading fees, once-daily funding, targeting 1,000+ markets by December 2026 → Yield as Margin (Nov) , use eligible Earn balances as trading margin while they keep earning → Grvt 2.0 app (late Nov) , everything in one unified self-custodial balance Yield as margin is the one I'm watching closest. Anyone with both a savings and a trading account knows the trade-off: one earns, the other sits idle. Grvt is building the version where you never have to choose. Announcement 1 done. Four to go.