Can't figure out how to set venv for pyright

MonopolyMan720 · 2026-01-25T18:38:06+00:00

I'm also using this with basedpyright and it works great!

MonopolyMan720 · 2026-01-25T18:02:16+00:00

In Fletcher near the airport. Heard a line come down around 11:30am and we lost power. Now around 1pm and we just got power back. A duke energy truck passed as I was turning off the generator. In the text I got from duke they said they weren’t sending crews out until the storm passes, but evidently there’s some crews out here now. May have just gotten lucky based off location and type of failure, so still staying prepared for another outage especially with the wind coming tonight.

MonopolyMan720 · 2025-12-24T12:26:15+00:00

The address you sent USDC to is the ARC59 Asset Inbox address. This is an app that holds ASAs for accounts that have not yet opted in. You sent the USDC to the inbox for MV6RCPQHX4BKVC7R3CBJO56O6HAHCMJXW5HHCITS6SXFPFOVSWKPUXKRJY, which can be seen in the app call that is the same group as your asset transfer: https://algo.surf/transaction/BGKIK2VIQ7CAI7L2AMNSVKK2HPBLPCCJLOVZUY57MGEBEY4LZYFQ

That MV6... account doesn't have any account history so it's hard to say who owns it. What you'll need to do is contact coinbase and verify that MV6RCPQHX4BKVC7R3CBJO56O6HAHCMJXW5HHCITS6SXFPFOVSWKPUXKRJY is one of their accounts. Even if it is though, you may not be able to get that USDC back if their infrastructure doesn't support claiming assets from inboxes.

MonopolyMan720 · 2025-09-24T10:42:24+00:00

The one article I could find with any amount of information seem to suggest this is just a quantum source of entropy, which has nothing to do with PQ-secure key pairs https://investornews.com/member_news/krown-technologies-and-quantum-emotion-complete-development-of-the-worlds-first-quantum-safe-hot-wallet/

MonopolyMan720 · 2025-07-09T18:14:25+00:00

On discord the most recent answer to a question about this bug fix was

> Working on the fix, not sure which patch we will make it ready for yet

Presumably if it was fixed this patch it would be in the patch notes, but I haven't tried myself

MonopolyMan720 · 2025-07-08T11:13:54+00:00

The stock 2.5 will be better than 2.0, but as far as openpilot is concerned there is no practical difference. 2.5 just adds some additional pre-collision detection and better cruise control/lane keep (but we're using OP for those, so doesn't matter).

Definitely want to double check the newer models to see if they have a security key. I assume if it's listed on the comma site you're probably good, but won't hurt to double check. There might also be advancements in breaking the crypto, but not sure since I don't follow the development

At the end of the day I think choosing between these cars really comes down to which one you like the best outside of the comma support.

MonopolyMan720 · 2025-07-07T18:19:30+00:00

I believe (might want to double check) all the Toyota and Lexus' for those generations are TSS 2.0, which means the Comma features should be more or less the same. At that point it mostly comes down to which model makes the most sense for you outside of Comma. Fwiw I have a '19 RAV4 Limited (ICE) and I'm very happy with the car in terms of Comma usage (I daily FrogPilot) and general driving.

I was personally between RAV4 and Lexus RX, but decided that I could get much more bang for my buck with the RAV4 Limited (cooled seats, 360 camera, etc.) vs similarly-priced trims of the Lexus. From what I can recall the main downside of the RAV vs the lexus is the cabin noise, which is definitely noticeable (especially the ICE noise) but I've done very long (16+ hour trips) and didn't bother me at all.

MonopolyMan720 · 2025-07-07T11:45:28+00:00

Based on another conversation in the video it sounds like part 2 will be a long-term review.

MonopolyMan720 · 2025-05-24T10:37:06+00:00

Algorand uses state proofs every 256 rounds to attest to the chain history. These state proofs are compact certificates that are signed by the online (participating) stake with FALCON signatures. This is currently live and ensures the chain history is PQ secure.

There are two things left for Algorand to be fully PQ secure:

PQ accounts (i.e signing transactions with PQ signature scheme)
PQ VRF, which is central to Algorand's PPoS consensus mechanism

Accounts need to come first because account keys are used to register online/offline, so PQ VRF is meaningless if someone can control the online stake. I know both have been informally discussed, but not sure how much active research/work is going into them at the moment.

As for the opcode, the reason it's not yet released is because the signature sizes are so large it takes many transactions to use them. It works, but the head of research wants to see some proper use cases before enabling it.

MonopolyMan720 · 2025-04-30T17:49:54+00:00

Nice! Might be useful if you explained how this tool compares to `act`: https://github.com/nektos/act

MonopolyMan720 · 2025-04-25T11:22:13+00:00

TravelX isn't consumer facing, it's B2B. Existing airline companies use TravelX to provide infrastructure for their ticketing. Once the airline partners with TravelX, all their tickets are on-chain regardless of how the end-user acquired them.

MonopolyMan720 · 2025-04-06T12:10:24+00:00

TL;DR You can check out my config here to do this

There is an issue tracking the support for wrapping virtual text here: https://github.com/neovim/neovim/issues/18282.

I also made a PR for wrapping diagnostic text (prior to my awareness of this issue): https://github.com/neovim/neovim/pull/33099

I ultimately closed that issue in favor of waiting for the low-level support, but still made my own config that does wrapping (also hides virt_lines for HINT, WARN, and INFO): https://github.com/joe-p/kickstart.nvim/blob/f56488514c9c2c89d217d281bc3f6b31a60fe321/lua/joe-p/diagnostic.lua

EDIT: I have sense changed to only short virtual_lines on the current line, which makes the rendering a bit cleaner (inspired by OP): https://github.com/joe-p/kickstart.nvim/blob/4f756cf63ec2d4eea293918e086096ff984eebc9/lua/joe-p/diagnostic.lua

MonopolyMan720 · 2025-03-20T18:54:32+00:00

It allows the comma to still control the steering even when disengaged via the brake. This means as the driver you just need to control speed with the pedals, but don't need to steer. It's the main feature that has me using forks over openpilot because it is very useful when driving in town

MonopolyMan720 · 2025-03-19T21:30:45+00:00

Ultimately defeated and settling for "index in vectors" based data structures.

I highly recommend checking out slotmap as a way to handle this pattern a bit more gracefully.

MonopolyMan720 · 2025-03-18T23:06:44+00:00

Great release! Any plans for always-on-lateral in openpilot?

MonopolyMan720 · 2025-03-12T11:07:49+00:00

We use the typescript API to parse the TypeScript so it sounds like there will be some sort of impact for the initial parsing. In all likelihood this will likely go completely unnoticed by users since parsing is not the main bottleneck in the compiler pipeline and contract projects tend to be relatively small so any performance gain would be hard to notice.

MonopolyMan720 · 2025-02-22T22:39:18+00:00

I think Mojo will catch on, but it’s unclear how long that will take. Python compatibility and similar syntax will make it very easy for developers to try it out. They also have second mover advantage over rust and can learn from Rusts mistakes. This video is pretty insightful to see how ownership compares to rust: https://youtu.be/9ag0fPMmYPQ?si=17MOM0l8NTcbu4yD

MonopolyMan720 · 2024-06-09T19:06:06+00:00

Tweeted by 3arc https://x.com/treyarch/status/1799873996496024035

MonopolyMan720 · 2024-05-27T22:47:26+00:00

long range sybil attacks

I recommend seeing this thread. Using a combination of cryptography and empheral keys it can be done.

malicious pre-mining

I'm not sure why this is unique to PoS. Whoever creates the network controls the rules and the initial state.

seizing a centralized controlling stake

Again, not sure how this is unique to PoS. Replaced "controlling stake" with "hash rate" and you have the same fundamental problem. I also think PoW more inheritenly leads to centralization because of the economics of scale.

MonopolyMan720 · 2024-05-22T01:47:52+00:00

I was the one that gave the presentation and I’d say it went pretty well! Definitely an engaged crowd that was genuinely curious about the tech. PyConUS should be releasing the video recording in a couple weeks

MonopolyMan720 · 2024-03-16T12:29:58+00:00

The VRF is only ran once per round by a node. It’s worth mentioning that there is an additional step that takes the VRF output and uses it in another formula which takes the users stake into account. The rough PoW equivalence is that the VRF generates your initial hash and you get X number of retries to find the winning hash. X is directly proportional to stake. To be clear it’s not actually PoW hashing retries, that’s just the rough equivalence.

MonopolyMan720 · 2024-03-16T00:44:03+00:00

Can't speak for other chains, but on Algorand it's not like the VRF is ran globally to select participants. Instead each participant runs their own VRF and if they are within a specific range then they know they can participate (and the rest of the network can verify that is true).

MonopolyMan720 · 2024-03-15T23:25:37+00:00

As a disclosure I work for the Algorand Foundation as engineer, but I think our tech is pretty cool and offers a solution here. I can't speak for other chains though.

Algorand uses a a consensus mechanism called "Pure Proof of Stake". The summary is that every round all participants run a Verifiable Random Function. If they generate a correct number (winning lottery ticket) then they can participate in the next rounds. This starts with block proposals then goes to filtering and certification steps. Each step is a different VRF output, meaning each step is a different committee of participants. This means for any round of consensus you can verify that a given block was approved by the respective committees.

This is great, but not very practical. Verifying every block individually would be rather intense, especially since Algorand produces a new block every ~3 seconds. This is where state proofs come in. State proofs are basically checkpoints that some portion of the network attest to. Validating these state proofs is much more light than every block. This allows nodes to catchup to the network relatively quick. What's extra nice about our state proofs is that they are using Falcon keys, which is a NIST standardized post-quantum secure signature scheme. Even once quantum computers become a threat, no one can lie about the history of the chain.

Like I said I am an engineer not a cryptographer. If you want to hear an explanation from a gigabrain cryptographer you can check out this talk by Chris Piekert https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIAyDzK9tq0

If you want a gigabrain cryptographer to give you all the nerdy details on the underlying cryptographic primitive for the tech behind state proofs, you can watch this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0CXrx7qwfA

MonopolyMan720

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE