Revolut’s mistake is the news, but the bigger problem is the growing number of companies being encouraged or required to keep copies of our most sensitive identity documents. |
Online bank Revolut has revealed that it gave out sensitive personal and financial information of an undisclosed number of its customers in response to a fake government request. The information that was handed over to an “unauthorized third party” reportedly includes names, dates of birth, occupations, addresses, phone numbers, account numbers, transaction histories (including Bitcoin), and even copies of government-issued IDs and onboarding verification selfies. Revolut claims that derived biometric face data was not. The company said that the data was handed over in response to an email that came from a real government agency’s domain, but was not actually sent or authorized by that agency. The email passed several authentication checks (SPF, DKIM, and DMARC) that are designed to establish the authenticity of a message’s origin and integrity, but do not verify the legitimacy of the legal request itself. Revolut said that it complied with the request “under the reasonable belief that it was an authentic government agency request” – and only later found out that it was not. Revolut said it later realized its mistake, blocked the email address, and reported the incident to the relevant authorities. Revolut said that only a “limited” number of its customers were affected by the data leak, and that the company’s systems were not hacked, nor was any money stolen. The story broke on September 11 when Revolut customers started receiving an email notice about a data leak, and the news was picked up by media outlets the following day.  The reason this is a recurring problem is that companies are keeping highly sensitive information about their customers’ identities, and sometimes even financial transactions, for a long time, and this data is then available to be disclosed to third parties – either in response to valid legal requests, or, as in the case of Revolut, fake ones. One reason for this is know your customer (KYC) and anti-money laundering (AML) rules. Revolut’s current UK customer privacy notice spells it out: the company generally keeps personal data of UK customers for no more than seven years after the relationship ends, and sometimes longer – for legal reasons. This means that even if you close your account, your identity documents don’t disappear. And while the incident with Revolut happened in the financial sector, it’s by no means the only one that requires customers to hand over sensitive identity information. Discord, a popular chat service, said in an October 9, 2025 security update that government ID photos of approximately 70,000 users may have been exposed after a third-party customer service provider got hacked. This was not a financial service, nor the same type of attack. But the result was similar – because the underlying business process was the same: requiring and storing sensitive identity documents. In the case of Discord, these were used to review age-related appeals. It’s hard to do anything about a copy of your old passport, or a photo of your face, or a record of your past transactions. These can be used to identify and profile you, and can be used to carry out targeted fraud. And this can happen even if the initial disclosure didn’t result in financial loss. The more companies are forced to collect and store such information, and the more of it they have, the more opportunities there are for this data to be leaked, either by the company itself or a third party it works with. That's what makes governments' push for more ID checks just to access ordinary parts of life so reckless.
🙏To support my work, Helping to keep the signal high and the noise low: 👉 Cashapp: $thedinarian 👉 Buy me a coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/thedinarian 👉 PayPal: Scan the QR code below 📲 or Click Here:
👇 Crypto Donations 👇 XRP: r9pid4yrQgs6XSFWhMZ8NkxW3gkydWNyQX |
Dinarian888
?The Dinarian exists because the truth deserves a platform. Covering cryptocurrency, blockchain technology, global agendas, emerging science, and consciousness — because everything is connected and people deserve to know it. Knowledge is power. ?
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
Dinarian888@dinarian888
August 11, 2022
Fantoms SpiritSwap V2 is LIVE — UI & protocol upgrades
Users can now enjoy V2 via the following link: beta.spiritswap.finance
SpiritSwap has come a long way since its inception on the Fantom network one year ago. This past year has been full of highs and lows but at the end of the day the Spirit team has loved sharing every minute of this journey with you all! To celebrate our continued ingenuity and drive to consistently add value to the Fantom ecosystem, SpiritSwap is pleased to present V2 and subsequent protocol upgrades.
This project in itself has been a monumental effort by our development team, all coordinated by our core team members in their respective fields. This product is a result from months of blood, sweat, tears and a severe lack of sleep. To start, SpiritSwap would like to thank everyone involved in the development of this major overhaul.
This article explains our reasons for the V2 upgrade, what the upgrade entails, the key differences between V1 & V2, along with the architectural upgrades to the AMM infrastructure and the underlying updates to some of the contracts.
The work doesn’t stop here. Upon deploying V2, the team will be getting straight to work on V2.1 upgrades, which consist of functionality upgrades that would have taken too long to implement in the V2 rollout, balance is key.
V2 TLDR 1 minute ;
>New AMMs in the mix
>Protocol Fees: Giving back to the protocols, whenever a protocol lists with us, SpiritSwap rebates protocols` 25% of the fees their pools generate
>Implementation of a master router. This means we can add new AMMs (like balancer weighted and linear or concentrated AMMs) without having to upgrade our UI or contracts.
>Fee reduction from 0.3% to 0.18% for Classic AMM (customizable fees down to 0.01%)
>Stable AMM introduced at 0.04% fees (customizable fees down to 0.01%)
>More fees for inSPIRIT holders from 0.05% — 0.135% (Includes both base fee and vote fee)
>Non-dilutive tokenomics for inSPIRIT holders through ve(3,3) model
>Making the inSPIRIT model more sustainable: Using a mix of solidly voting models
>Introduction of Permissionless Spirit farms
> In-built bribe UI
> Gauge proxy divided into 3 isolated gauge proxies for greater balance of emissions
V2.1 TLDR;
>Introduction of weighted pools
>Introduction of linear pools — better capital efficiency by feeding to lending network
>Introduction of Permissionless Ecosystem farms
> Upgrades to bribes (% based bribes, limit bribes)
V2 will be released in two stages. The first being a public beta, which is live as of today. This gives the public the ability to switch between V1 and V2 at their leisure. The current plan is for V2 beta to be live for 2 weeks, allowing the team to receive feedback and bug reports from the community. Over this time, the development team will dedicate 95 % of development resources to remedy any reported bugs from the community. Upon this round of community testing being complete, the team will redeploy our URL to face our V2 product thus making V2 our official application moving forward.
V2 TLDR 5 minutes :
Huge overhaul of fee structure with the aim to pass as much value back to inSPIRIT holders and protocols who support SpiritSwap.
Notably our vAMM fee has been reduced from 0.3% — 0.18%. This provides a positive feedback loop between aggregator traffic, volume and fees. The introduction of the new Vote Fee further rewards inSPIRIT holders who vote on gauges that have the ecosystem’s best interest at heart. The introduction of the Protocol Fee further incentivizes protocols to add liquidity with SpiritSwap, establishing a pool of deep liquidity for more optimal trade pricing.
Bridge swap upgrade:
SpiritSwap’s bridge aggregator will pave the way for a myriad of other chains to be added to the bridge. As a part of this upgrade, people will now be able to simultaneously swap while they bridge. For example, users can now send BNB from Binance Smart Chain to Fantom Opera, but in the same process, convert this BNB to FTM with one click.
We have 2 options — cheaper fees or faster transactions.
Bribe UI:
Isolated gauge proxies:
What was a “singular gauge proxy” for boosted farms, has now been segregated into 3 isolated gauge proxies for greater control over emissions on pairs that are crucial to the SpiritSwap ecosystem.
Running snapshots and facilitating airdrops for bribes is cumbersome and laborious. It’s not a good use of developer time. As such, the bribe process has been simplified for both developers and the community. Developers of projects who have gauges can now offer a bribe and set this up directly within our inSPIRIT UI. Subsequently, inSPIRIT holders who vote on farms with active bribes can also collect their voting fees directly within the inSPIRIT page, along with their inSPIRIT weekly rewards.
Isolated gauge proxies:
What was a “singular gauge proxy” for boosted farms, has now been segregated into 3 isolated gauge proxies for greater control over emissions on pairs that are crucial to the SpiritSwap ecosystem.
Real Yield — Anti dilution for inSPIRIT holders:
This aims to further stimulate the adoption of inSPIRIT for new and existing participants in our ecosystem. The Real Yield model sees emissions redirected to ensure loyal inSPIRIT holders are never diluted by farmers.
In depth overview 20 minutes
UI and codebase upgrades.
Soully has undergone some cosmetic surgery, SOME being an understatement. As you will notice, the entire layout of the SpiritSwap application has changed for a more simplified, crisp, clean and professional look. On top of this, we have rebuilt the ENTIRE code base from scratch, which is why V2 has been such a long drawn process.
In layman’s terms, by building this code ourselves (rather than relying on forked code) we understand the mechanics of this code much better, thus are able to execute a rapid turnaround time on fixing bugs and expediting deployment of new features. Needless to say the functionality of our DEX will now be much quicker than V1.
Offering a user interface that embodies the playful nature of Soully, while highlighting the key elements users expect from a DEX, is where inspiration came from. We wanted to keep things as minimalistic as possible, meanwhile offering the layers of detail that more seasoned DeFi users have come to expect from an aspiring tier 1 DEX.
The layout of the application was given careful consideration, specifically focusing on the flow of interaction. As users will notice, their journey within the application begins where all DeFi users would expect, their portfolio. Our home page now doubles as a portfolio page, which gives a detailed overview of all user positions including single held assets, LP positions, farm, winSPIRIT, lending and borrowing, as well as eventual ApeMode positions. This will offer all users a more enhanced overview of their positions on SpiritSwap and all key components / features that are offered as a protocol.
The new landing page will feature an overview of ALL key components that SpiritSwap brings to market. Included in these key components is user education, as a lot of users are new to defi. Ensuring users who arrive at our landing page have immediate access to information they need to make informed decisions is of immense importance. As such, when new users initially arrive at the landing page before entering the application, they are offered a myriad of information that details each individual feature via the ability to click on pop up infographic cards explaining the intricacy of each feature.
Basic AMM features like Swap, Bridge, Liquidity and Farms, still retain their standard functionality but with a new look and feel to the design. The focus was to keep as much of this functionality as familiar as possible for our existing users.
However you will notice that there are some new feature additions to farms and liquidity, which aligns with some of our new AMM architecture. These will be covered in a separate paragraph related to AMM upgrades.
The inSPIRIT page has also undergone a huge facelift, now offering far greater user experience. Users can now toggle between locking more SPIRIT or increasing their delegation period to eliminate any confusion. The process of locking inSPIRIT has now also been broken down into a simple 3 step process, replicating a walkthrough type approach for users participating in our inSPIRIT model. This makes the process seamless, easy to understand and eliminates any confusion for those who are new to the ecosystem or struggle to comprehend the process.
The farm voting panel has also been updated to offer improved UX via farm voting rebalance exclusion. Currently users must exclude farms they don’t want to vote for, otherwise vote percentages will automatically be rebalanced accordingly. This has led to a cumbersome and frustrating experience for V1 users and has been something we have strived to improve since the initial inSPIRIT deployment.
My farms toggle function: This allows users to automatically flip a switch that only displays their active farms in the voting panel. This improves UX as users no longer need to scroll through endless farms picking out the ones that are pertinent to their investment strategies, but rather streamline this approach by only displaying their active positions. This also helps users easily identify the most lucrative farms to vote for in order to capture the largest amount of voting fees.
AMM upgrades.
SpiritV2 will launch with two AMMs. A variable AMM (vAMM) for variable liquidity pairs (vLP) and a stable AMM (sAMM) for stable liquidity pairs (sLP). This AMM is a modified version of Solidly with an upgrade to the fee structure.
Our AMM architecture is preceded with a master router for swaps on SpiritV2. This means we can add new AMMs (like balancer weighted/linear pools or new types of AMMs) without having to upgrade our UI or contracts. They can just be added in the master router.
In this new AMM format, swap fees now accumulate outside of LP tokens in an LP Fee contract. This is unlike our old (UniV2) AMM in which fees are compounded directly into the LP tokens themselves. In this architecture each LP Pair contract has an associated LP Fee contract to handle this logic. Breaking out the accumulated swap fees from the LPs themselves allows us to implement our LP voting logic into the gauge system (more on that later).
The sAMM will allow for the ability to set different fees than the vAMM which Solidly didn't allow for. We see this as an opportunity to fix a broken system, which is why the SpiritSwap AMM’s offers variable fee functionality. The thought process here is that by utilizing the (X²+Y²)(XY)/2=K formula, we achieve a higher concentration of liquidity resulting in tighter spreads and lower impermanent loss. This means we can offer a far better execution on swaps (fees/slippage).
Further to this, SpiritSwap also achieves the ability to offer peg support, meaning SpiritSwap can now offer more effective pricing on stable trades, but also the ability to offer a more targeted solution to tokens that require peg maintenance. With this integration, winSPIRIT pairs will achieve more effective peg maintenance. This will now entice winSPIRIT pairs to stay where they belong and retain profitability on these pairs being traded, meaning inSPIRIT holders won’t miss out on the fees captured by any trading of inSPIRIT pairs that are currently based on other AMM’s.
By offering a more competitive pricing delivery on certain stable pairs, SpiritSwap will subsequently be more competitive in the aggregator space, meaning fees we were missing out on via DEX aggregation, will be a thing of the past.
Better pricing = more fees captured by proxy of DEX aggregation.
Further to this AMM architecture upgrade, SpiritSwap intends to add another layer of architecture to the mix in V2.1 that will allow for more enhanced trading functionality, offering the ability for us to bootstrap enhanced trader UI onto our front end. For now that update will remain as a surprise for a later day.
Fee structure:
The fee structure for SpiritSwap has also undergone some upgrades. The upgraded AMM has variable fees that can be updated by governance and can go as low as 0.01%. This will help us remain competitive with fees and we won’t have to redeploy even if our competitors lower their fees. Unlike Solidly, the vAMM and sAMM can have different fees, this makes sense because stable swaps should have lower fees than variable swaps because they incur less IL.
Moving forward, SpiritSwap will be reducing fees from 0.3% to 0.18% for our classic vAMM while establishing the ability to have an even more competitive fee for our new sAMM at a respectable 0.01%.
The reason for this stems from the realization that it’s better to capture a smaller slice of a bigger pie rather than trying to take the entire pie for ourselves. This update will see a more optimal pricing on trades, meaning that we capture a larger amount of aggregator traffic (fees that are currently being missed out on).
The distribution of fees has also undergone a change. The current model sees fees allocated as follows:
5 / 6 of fees are currently given back to LP’s
1 / 6 of fees are currently used to buy back SPIRIT at market rate and distribute to inSPIRIT holders during our weekly reward distribution.
vAMM & sAMM fee restructure:
Moving forward, Fees accumulate outside of LP token (unlike uniV2 which compounds fees directly into LP). Fees will be allocated as follows:
25 % will go to our base fee:
The base fee is exactly the same as the current inSPIRIT distribution. These are the SPIRIT rewards that all inSPIRIT holders collect at the end of each distribution epoch. It is pertinent to note that with the reduction in fee we are hopeful our routers will collect a higher volume of trade traffic from aggregators. Due to increased volume by virtue of a reduced fee, this increase in volume is expected to capture a higher distribution for inSPIRIT holders each week.
25% of fees will go to the new Protocol Fee model:
The protocol reward fee model is a rebate to protocols who list LP’s with us, for example Liquid Driver.
Out of all fees collected on Liquid Drivers liquidity pools, 25% of these will be given back to the protocol who lists with us (in this example Liquid Driver).
Read more at: https://spiritswap.medium.com/spiritswap-v2-is-live-ui-protocol-upgrades-bec064ebba61
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
Bill Gates just said we may have to suffer a “BIG CYBER ATTACK”
Bill Gates just said we may have to suffer a “BIG CYBER ATTACK” before we “respond as fully as we should” to AI.
That sounds like a threat to me.
AI false flag risk remains HIGH.
00:00:23
They Are Making It Easier And Easiet For The Average Joe To Trade 😉
X partners with crypto and stock exchanges to allow trading from the timeline.
•GGeiin
•Kraken
•Moomoo
• Coinaas
00:00:40
🤖 China reportedly deploys humanoid robot alongside armed police for Shenzhen patrols 🤖
A video circulating online appears to show an EngineAI T800 humanoid robot accompanying armed officers during a community patrol in Shenzhen’s Nanshan District. The footage is striking, but the robot’s official role and operational capabilities remain unclear.
🔑 Key points
🔹 EngineAI T800 identified: The humanoid platform shown is reportedly EngineAI’s T800 model.
🔹 Police patrol setting: The robot appears alongside armed officers in a public community environment.
🔹 Official deployment is unconfirmed: The video alone does not establish whether this was a routine patrol, demonstration, pilot program, or promotional event.
🔹 Its actual role remains unclear: The robot may be used for public engagement, observation, crowd visibility, data collection, or testing rather than direct law enforcement.
🔹 Humanoid form fits existing environments: A human-shaped robot can potentially move through spaces, stairs, doors, and infrastructure designed for people.
🔹 Human officers ...
00:00:21
🚨 Chutes is being framed as a Hyperliquid-style breakout for decentralized AI inference, with live revenue, verified GPU infrastructure, and a direct challenge to centralized cloud AI 🚨
Chutes is gaining attention as a decentralized AI inference platform that claims to combine real usage, cryptographic verification, confidential computing, and open-source infrastructure into a working production system. The thesis is simple: instead of trusting Big Tech clouds with AI workloads, users get a distributed compute layer built around verification and privacy.
🔑 Key points
🔹 Chutes is live in production and reportedly scaled to more than 1,170 active GPU nodes, including large numbers of Nvidia H200s and Blackwell-class hardware.
🔹 The platform says it has processed nearly 38 trillion tokens since launch across 53 deployed applications and more than 700,000 registered users.
🔹 The team reportedly cut unprofitable usage programs, reduced total token volume, and still improved revenue efficiency, with revenue per GPU rising sharply after removing subsidized traffic.
🔹 Chutes is using post-quantum cryptography, trusted execution environments, and Nvidia confidential ...
🚨 JPMorgan’s criticism of the CLARITY Act is fueling a fresh power struggle over who gets to write America’s crypto rules 🚨
A new clash is emerging between legacy finance and crypto legislation after JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon reportedly warned that the CLARITY Act could let crypto firms offer bank-like products without bank-level oversight. The dispute is quickly turning into a larger fight over regulation, competitiveness, and who controls the future architecture of digital finance in the United States.
🔑 Key points
🔹 Jamie Dimon reportedly called the CLARITY Act a threat to the financial system, arguing it could allow crypto firms to offer yield-like products while avoiding the capital, reserve, and oversight burdens traditional banks face.
🔹 Senator Cynthia Lummis pushed back publicly, framing the issue as a global strategic race and warning that if the U.S. does not set digital asset standards, other powers will.
🔹 The core tension is whether the bill creates legitimate regulatory clarity or simply opens the door to regulatory arbitrage for crypto platforms operating outside the traditional banking...
👉 Coinbase just launched an AI agent for Crypto Trading
Custom AI assistants that print money in your sleep? 🔜
The future of Crypto x AI is about to go crazy.
👉 Here’s what you need to know:
💠 'Based Agent' enables creation of custom AI agents
💠 Users set up personalized agents in < 3 minutes
💠 Equipped w/ crypto wallet and on-chain functions
💠 Capable of completing trades, swaps, and staking
💠 Integrates with Coinbase’s SDK, OpenAI, & Replit
👉 What this means for the future of Crypto:
1. Open Access: Democratized access to advanced trading
2. Automated Txns: Complex trades + streamlined on-chain activity
3. AI Dominance: Est ~80% of crypto 👉txns done by AI agents by 2025
🚨 I personally wouldn't bet against Brian Armstrong and Jesse Pollak.
10gb Free Encrypted Backup 😉 | Bittensor Hippius
🚨 A $TAO SUBNET JUST SHIPPED A CONSUMER APP THAT UNDERCUTS GOOGLE DRIVE AND DROPBOX. ON YOUR PHONE. TODAY.
Hippius, SN75, is live on Google Play. iOS is next.
Your photos and files, backed up automatically and end to end encrypted on your phone before they ever upload. Same account and storage you already use on desktop and web.
Now the price.
2 TB of storage:
• Hippius Plus: $7 a month
• Google Drive: $9.99
• Dropbox: $9.99 to $11.99
30 to 42% cheaper, and it is encrypted by default. Google and Dropbox can read your files. Hippius cannot. Sign up and you get 10 GB free to try it.
Read that again.
Cheaper and more private at the same time. That combination is supposed to be impossible in cloud storage.
THE BUSINESS SIDE IS EVEN BETTER
S3 compatible storage at $6 per TB pay as you go, down to $4.65 per TB on the Enterprise plan and $4.00 per TB from 250 TB. Egress included. Works with any S3 client.
Their own comparison at the same usage: Hippius $6 a month. Backblaze B2 $977. Google Cloud Storage $8,020. ...
Silver News 📰
📊 Key Takeaways & Market Highlights:
🚗 Samsung’s Solid-State Battery Bombshell
Reports suggest that if Samsung’s silver solid-state battery technology is scaled across 130 million EVs, it could consume up to 4.18 billion ounces of silver.
That is equal to over 5 years of total global mine production combined!
⛏️ Peaks in Mine Supply vs. Growing Deficits
Global silver mine production actually peaked 11 years ago (~892M oz in 2015 down to ~846M oz). The market is experiencing its 6th consecutive year of structural supply deficits.
🏠 Gold vs. Real Estate Purchasing Power
In 1963, a new American home cost roughly 509 oz of gold.
Today, a median new U.S. home costs only 91 oz of gold—highlighting gold's dramatic preservation of purchasing power relative to fiat currency.
🏦 Wall Street Turning Bullish on Industrial Metals
Major institutions like UBS have upgraded industrial metals to Overweight, citing long-term structural tailwinds, net-zero initiatives, and ...
Revolut Leak Shows the Cost of Constant ID Collection
This Is The Income A Family Needs To Live Comfortably In Every US State
Here’s the short version of what it takes for a family of four to live comfortably in 2026 by state:
In Massachusetts, you’d need nearly $330,000 a year - the highest figure in the entire country. Only three states clear the $300,000 mark: Massachusetts, Hawaii, and California. At the other end of the spectrum, Mississippi is the most affordable at about $188,000. That’s a full $142,000 less than what you’d need in Massachusetts.
So… how much does a family of four need in your state?
This map shows the pre-tax income a household with two working adults and two kids needs to live comfortably in every U.S. state.
The numbers come from SmartAsset (as of February 2026). They’re based on the familiar 50/30/20 budget: 50% for necessities, 30% for discretionary spending, and 20% for savings or other goals. These aren’t bare-minimum survival numbers—they’re what it takes to live pretty well while still putting money aside.
And as Visual Capitalist notes, Massachusetts sits at the very top of that list. Massachusetts tops the ranking, with a family of four needing $329,555 per year to meet the 50/30/20 benchmark.
Hawaii follows at $313,165, while California ranks third at $302,682.
Rank State Income needed for family of four (2026)
- 1 - Massachusetts - $329,555
- 2 - Hawaii - $313,165
- 3 - California - $302,682
- 4 - Connecticut - $298,189
- 5 - New Jersey - $295,110
- 6 - New York - $291,533
- 7 - Colorado - $283,213
- 8 - Washington - $281,798
- 9 - Oregon - $280,966
- 10 - Vermont - $280,384
- 11 - Alaska - $272,064
- 12 - New Hampshire - $267,904
- 13 - Rhode Island - $264,659
- 14 - Minnesota - $263,078
- 15 - Maryland - $257,837
- 16 - Maine - $250,931
- 17 - Montana - $249,434
- 18 - Pennsylvania - $247,936
- 19 - Illinois - $244,109
- 20 - Virginia - $242,944
- 21 - Nevada - $242,278
- 22 - Indiana - $241,696
- 23 - Wisconsin - $238,451
- 24 - Arizona - $236,870
- 25 - Utah - $235,789
- 26 - Delaware - $228,134
- 27 - Ohio - $226,221
- 28 - Idaho - $226,054
- 29 - Florida - $223,392
- 30 - New Mexico - $223,142
- 31 - Nebraska - $223,059
- 32 - Missouri - $217,734
- 33 - Georgia - $214,573
- 34 - Michigan - $214,323
- 35 - South Carolina - $212,909
- 36 - North Carolina - $212,410
- 37 - Wyoming - $212,410
- 38 - Oklahoma - $211,910
- 39 - North Dakota - $210,496
- 40 - Kansas - $207,917
- 41 - Iowa - $204,422
- 42 - Texas - $203,424
- 43 - West Virginia - $202,592
- 44 - South Dakota - $201,760
- 45 - Alabama - $198,931
- 46 - Louisiana - $197,933
- 47 - Tennessee - $197,267
- 48 - Arkansas - $195,437
- 49 - Kentucky - $194,854
- 50 - Mississippi - $187,533
Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York aren't far behind, bringing the number of states with comfortable-income thresholds above $290,000 to six.
Colorado and Vermont Make the Top 10
As expected, many of the highest income thresholds are concentrated in the Northeast and along the West Coast.
However, Colorado has the seventh-highest threshold in the country at $283,213, ranking above Washington and Oregon.
Vermont rounds out the top 10 at $280,384, despite having the second-smallest population of any U.S. state. Meanwhile, nearby states like New Hampshire, Maine, and Rhode Island all fall outside the top 10.
Just Six States Come in Below $200,000
Despite the wide range in living costs across the country, only six states have a comfortable-income threshold below $200,000 for a family of four.
Mississippi ranks lowest at $187,533, followed by Kentucky. The states of Arkansas, Tennessee, Louisiana, and Alabama also fall below the $200,000 mark.
The gap between Massachusetts and Mississippi exceeds $142,000 per year, meaning the Massachusetts benchmark is about 76% higher.
🙏To support my work, Helping to keep the signal high and the noise low:
👉 Cashapp: $thedinarian
👉 Buy me a coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/thedinarian
👉 PayPal: Scan the QR code below 📲 or Click Here:
👇 Crypto Donations Always Welcome 👇
XRP: r9pid4yrQgs6XSFWhMZ8NkxW3gkydWNyQX
XLM: GDMJF2OCHN3NNNX4T4F6POPBTXK23GTNSNQWUMIVKESTHMQM7XDYAIZT
XDC: xdcc2C02203C4f91375889d7AfADB09E207Edf809A6
🤖Can Decentralized AI Stop Big Tech from Owning the Future of Robotics?🤖
The race to build the future of robotics is no longer just about robots. It's about who controls the intelligence behind them.
Over the last three years, a small group of companies has emerged as the backbone of the AI revolution. Microsoft provides cloud infrastructure. NVIDIA supplies the chips. Google, OpenAI, Anthropic, Meta, and others develop the models. Together, they control much of the compute, data, and software stack powering modern AI.
Now that AI is moving into the physical world, many are asking a bigger question:
Will these same companies end up controlling robotics too?
It's a valid concern.
The latest generation of robots relies on enormous amounts of compute, simulation, training data, and foundation models. Many robotics startups today are built on infrastructure provided by large technology companies. NVIDIA's Omniverse is becoming a key simulation environment for robot training. Microsoft Azure is powering the training of robotics foundation models. Physical AI startups increasingly depend on hyperscale cloud infrastructure to train and deploy intelligent systems. Recent partnerships across the industry show just how central Big Tech has become to robotics development.
But while Big Tech is building the highways, another movement is trying to ensure it doesn't own every destination.
That movement is decentralized AI.
Why Decentralized AI Exists
The idea behind decentralized AI is simple. Instead of a handful of companies owning the models, compute infrastructure, data pipelines, and intelligence networks, these resources are distributed across thousands of participants.
This means anyone can contribute compute, contribute models, validate outputs and can participate.
The most visible example today is the decentralized AI network known as Bittensor (@bittensor). The network has evolved into a large ecosystem of specialized AI markets called subnets, where participants compete to provide useful machine intelligence and are rewarded based on performance. Rather than relying on a single company, intelligence is generated and validated by a distributed network of miners and validators.
Think of it as an attempt to build an open marketplace for AI instead of a world where intelligence is rented from a few centralized providers.
Why This Matters for Robotics
Robotics has a unique problem. Unlike chatbots, robots operate in the physical world. They need to perceive environments, make decisions, move safely and they need to learn continuously.
The challenge is that collecting and training on real-world robotic data is incredibly expensive. That's one reason large companies have such an advantage. They can afford the compute, simulation environments, and data infrastructure needed to train robotics models at scale.
This is where decentralized systems become interesting.
Instead of one company collecting all the data and training all the models, decentralized networks could allow thousands of contributors to participate in building robotic intelligence.
Imagine a future where:
- Warehouse robots contribute operational data.
- Delivery robots contribute navigation data.
- Factory robots contribute manipulation data.
- Developers contribute models.
- Validators evaluate performance.
The resulting intelligence becomes a shared network rather than a proprietary asset.
That vision is beginning to emerge.
Bittensor's Move Toward Physical AI
While many people associate Bittensor (@bittensor) with language models and AI services, parts of the ecosystem are increasingly exploring embodied intelligence and robotics.
One example is Kinitro, a subnet focused on incentivizing the training and evaluation of embodied AI systems. The goal is to create competitive environments where developers build robotic intelligence and are rewarded based on performance.
The broader Bittensor ecosystem has also expanded into compute marketplaces, distributed inference systems, bandwidth infrastructure, and AI coordination layers that could eventually support robotics workloads. Several subnets now focus on decentralized compute, confidential inference, data transfer, and model training, critical components for future robotic systems.
In other words, the pieces are starting to appear.
Not a decentralized robot network yet.
But the infrastructure that could support one.
Beyond Bittensor: The Rise of Physical AI Networks
Bittensor isn't alone.
Across the industry, researchers and builders are experimenting with decentralized approaches to physical AI.
New research published in 2026 introduced the concept of DAO-enabled decentralized physical AI, or DePAI. The idea combines robotics, decentralized infrastructure, AI models, governance systems, and human oversight into a single framework. Instead of centralized control, robots and physical infrastructure could be coordinated through transparent rules and distributed ownership models.
At the same time, developers are exploring decentralized operating systems for robots that allow machines to communicate directly with each other and with distributed compute resources. These architectures are designed to make robotic systems more resilient and less dependent on a single cloud provider.
The goal is not simply decentralization for its own sake.
The goal is resilience.
If one server fails, the system continues.
If one company disappears, the network survives.
If one participant leaves, innovation continues.
But Here's the Reality
Decentralized AI faces the same challenge every decentralized technology faces.
Big Tech has resources. A lot of resources.
Training advanced robotics models requires enormous compute budgets, sophisticated simulation environments, access to specialized hardware, and vast amounts of real-world data.
That's why many robotics startups still partner with major cloud providers and AI companies. It's often the fastest path to deployment.
And there are legitimate concerns about whether decentralized networks can maintain quality, reliability, and security at the scale required for industrial robotics. Even researchers studying decentralized AI systems have highlighted risks around concentration, incentives, governance, and network security.
The challenge isn't just decentralizing intelligence.
It's decentralizing intelligence while maintaining performance.
That's much harder.
The Most Likely Outcome
The future probably won't be fully centralized. And it probably won't be fully decentralized either. Instead, we're likely heading toward a hybrid model.
Large technology companies will continue providing chips, cloud infrastructure, simulation platforms, and foundational research.
At the same time, decentralized AI networks will emerge as alternative coordination layers where intelligence, data, and economic value can be shared more openly.
The companies building robots may use NVIDIA hardware.
Train on Azure.
Run foundation models from OpenAI.
But they may also participate in decentralized data networks, decentralized compute markets, and decentralized intelligence protocols.
The future of robotics could end up looking less like a monopoly and more like an ecosystem.
The Bigger Question
The real question isn't whether decentralized AI can eliminate Big Tech.
It can't.
At least not anytime soon.
The real question is whether decentralized AI can prevent a future where a handful of companies control every robot, every model, every dataset, and every decision made by the machines operating around us.
As robots become workers, assistants, delivery drivers, factory operators, and even economic agents, that question becomes increasingly important.
Because the battle for the future of robotics is no longer about hardware.
It's about who owns the intelligence.
And that battle is just getting started.
🙏To support my work, Helping to keep the signal high and the noise low:
👉 Cashapp: $thedinarian
👉 Buy me a coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/thedinarian
👉 PayPal: Scan the QR code below 📲 or Click Here:
👇 Crypto Donations 👇
XRP: r9pid4yrQgs6XSFWhMZ8NkxW3gkydWNyQX
XLM: GDMJF2OCHN3NNNX4T4F6POPBTXK23GTNSNQWUMIVKESTHMQM7XDYAIZT
XDC: xdcc2C02203C4f91375889d7AfADB09E207Edf809A6
