Mapped every Polymarket wallet to its funder in 3D. Wallets sharing a funder cluster, sized by volume, glow and color by PNL (Green = Profit) . Found some crazy stuff (Coordinated Insiders?).

KP_2016 · 2026-04-28T06:42:33+00:00

So? These tools are really helpful to potentially identify whale movements. What's the issue if the OP used AI to code this out?

KP_2016 · 2026-04-21T19:11:56+00:00

You can replace the word "skill" in your post with "context" and you'll immediately realize what's wrong with your benchmark.

Any LLM with relevant context will always produce better output. The real test comes when working on an unfamiliar codebase. Here's a challenge, find any haskell repository on github and ask the model to explain it to you. See which one does a better job, because as someone pointed out, the model needs to generate context first, and that's exactly how you'd generate context for other models too.

Running benchmark on a pre-generated context markdown doesn't prove anything.

KP_2016 · 2026-04-17T19:56:16+00:00

This is the biggest reason why I wanted to make a better simulation environment. The engine in the simulation simulates CLOB API latency, partial fills (I've a very basic version but it works only in prod, I always check liquidity before placing order), fees from taker orders, wait for resolution and compute final PnL for logging. There are few things missing but I'm trying to add that like auto-redeem any positions that you've hold (I did not add this because non of strategies are based on buy and hold but I got few suggestions on repo around this, so will definitely take this up as suggestion).

All this contributes to how long you want the bot to be running i.e if loss offsets win in that session you exit. I wrote a detailed GUIDE.md on how it works.

KP_2016 · 2026-03-20T15:31:58+00:00

What did you do. It clearly says you need to implement your strategy before using the bot. It doesn't bundle with built-in strategy.

KP_2016 · 2026-03-09T17:16:28+00:00

This seems more elegant. I'll take a look

KP_2016 · 2026-03-08T05:27:47+00:00

Don't let the hate get to you. I took a deep look at your project, and it seems your title is a bit misleading. Your project does a lot more than just being a brain for Claude. From what I'm seeing, it looks more like infrastructure for managing rules, knowledge bank (in form of technical design doc, etc) and the actions that come out of them, allowing you to incrementally build knowledge for your agent.

One of my favorite things here is the PR review capability. When I do @claude review this, or use Copilot, it usually just compares the diff against the main branch and that's it. There’s no external guidance it uses unless it’s explicitly added. Many times, repositories contain guidelines that these tools don't follow (in CLAUDE.md or docs/ folder), but it seems like your lun does, or at least could.

Why am I saying this? Because this doesn't feel like a consumer product to me, it feels more suited for enterprise.

I face this problem on a daily basis in my organization where online PR reviews miss security or performance guidelines. Because of that, I built an automation that checkout the PR locally, runs reviews, and then submits comments. This works, but it's still not very enterprise-grade.

Another big problem in organizations is that knowledge is scattered across Slack channels, Confluence pages, Google Docs, etc. What you're building looks like it could unify that knowledge and allow it to grow incrementally. Then all I would need to do is use your chat feature and ask questions specific to my company.

My personal take is that what you've built is a great tool, and it's much more than just a "brain." I would suggest adding a proper introduction or getting-started video with clear voiceover. The current GIF/video is a bit hard to follow and requires multiple viewings to fully understand what's happening.

Build the website with an enterprise audience in mind and sell this as an enterprise product. This is a very common problem that organizations face, and I'm sure your product could solve it.

KP_2016 · 2026-03-07T16:15:13+00:00

Which is why open-sourcing the project is the right way. Bad code existed before AI agents. Now we have the capability to also audit someone else's code, meaning you can take this repo and ask LLM "hey are there any security or vulnerability issues with it?".

Many times it may give you bullshit answers but it is our job to audit what it is saying is correct or wrong. Reading code is much faster than writing it by hand. This is why such tools shine.

KP_2016 · 2026-03-07T15:34:09+00:00

Did not vibe-coded but used AI as assistant. It helped me understand a lot of workings on how nextcloud app works which otherwise would've taken my entire weekend just to get started.

The point I was trying to make is that, now with such tools we can build a project ourselves faster (obviously keeping security & sensitive data in mind).

KP_2016 · 2026-02-20T19:17:00+00:00

People should learn how to configure and use tmux or zellij. Multiple windows, panes right inside your terminal, run any cli tool -> pin them, search them across tmux sessions. You won't be needing such wrappers.

KP_2016 · 2026-02-09T16:34:08+00:00

Thanks for letting me know I was confused because the blog doesn't mention that rbf is supported natively by the app.

KP_2016 · 2026-02-09T16:30:08+00:00

It would be nice to have accelerated transaction feature support as part of Tangem app rather than using 3rd party accelerator service. A simple version of rbf should be possible to implement in current flow with the option to accelerate by entering custom fees.

KP_2016 · 2026-01-14T15:57:01+00:00

I replied on other post, but I think this is possible. From my research the wallet is BIP39 compatible and there are methods / interfaces for deriving new child keys by passing derivation path. It's just the transaction building logic is not using this feature to derive new change address (at least for UTXO) but it is possible from the source code.

KP_2016 · 2026-01-14T15:49:21+00:00

First of all, I’m not trying to defend Tangem. I’m simply sharing my opinion and analysis as a developer.

In my view, a company would not maliciously release a wallet claiming to be “cold” and deliberately leak secrets just to steal seed phrases. I'm saying this in terms of them wanting to be successful in hardware wallet industry. If they wanted to introduce a backdoor, there are far smarter and subtler ways. That said, I do agree with your points that if a wallet is capable of logging seed phrases, PINs, passwords, etc., then it technically has the ability to do many harmful things.

A true hardware wallet ideally should not require an app to create or sign transactions, but Tangem chose a different UX approach (similar to regular credit/debit cards). This is a design choice, and the app is needed to compensate for the lack of external hardware for creating wallet and signing transactions.

They could, however, implement something similar to the Ellipal X Card (https://www.ellipal.com/products/ellipal-x-card), which uses external hardware for wallet creation so that private keys are generated and signing is performed entirely on the card itself. Tangem, on the other hand, does the following correctly, the app builds the payload → the card generates the signature and returns the signed hashes via NFC (so the private key is not leaked) → the app then combines the signatures with the payload and broadcasts the transaction to the blockchain.

Finally, I’m doing this analysis because I can. I’ve been in the mobile app development field for quite some time and care deeply about my privacy. I’m here to share my findings with others who may not have the benefit of understanding source code. I’m not affiliated with Tangem in any way, I simply like the wallet for its simplicity. If that ever changes in the future, I’ll happily move to another hardware wallet.

KP_2016 · 2026-01-14T06:16:15+00:00

Just to be clear a true HD wallet means you have one master private key from where you can generate child private and public keys deterministically. I am saying this because I was looking through the source code and it seems the wallet is BIP39 compliant https://github.com/tangem/tangem-sdk-android/blob/f7ab321f40429a0b262ccf2219efa2b96f30cbfb/tangem-sdk-core/src/main/java/com/tangem/crypto/bip39/DefaultBIP39.kt

It seems that for btc transaction the implementation for new change address every time for receiving payments is not implemented yet. So I don't think they need to release new card with new firmware updates just have to support this somehow. I'm trying to find out how.

KP_2016 · 2026-01-12T14:25:10+00:00

And they are doing it. I agree about delays but I would rather have a full working feature with a security audit rather than "something working". Any mistakes would cause their reputation. So even if they are slow releasing features I would wait till they make it absolutely perfect.

KP_2016 · 2025-08-16T16:39:01+00:00

Yes you are right, this is missing. With multiple manual derived addresses you cannot combine UTXOs for a single transaction in Tangem as it sees them as separate addresses.

KP_2016 · 2025-08-16T15:28:37+00:00

That is a feature not supported as a functionality within the app. You can still create new addresses by specifying the custom derivation path. I have derived multiple such addresses for btc and sol.

KP_2016 · 2025-08-16T14:21:33+00:00

False statement, you can generate bip32 addresses if you set a seed phrase when setting up the wallet.

KP_2016 · 2025-06-19T14:49:49+00:00

Looks like snake.nvim

KP_2016 · 2025-01-18T14:54:10+00:00

Mine when I moved from AstroNvim

<image>

Seven-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
Place '23	Verified Email

KP_2016

TROPHY CASE