within 30 seconds of opening a support ticket on hyperliquid discord i had 17 support agents ready to help! everyone is so darn friendly around here splendid hospitality

boy math: liquid personal net worth: $859 PAPER indicative price $0.028 PAPER balance, my wallet: 100,000,000 probability PAPER becomes transferrable some day: 12% EV-adjusted PNW: $336,859

funny how every serious quant trader type on the tl quickly identified / agreed upon serious fatal "unresolved vectors" (sheesh) and set a p(protocol death) = 1 for papertrade several variations on the thinking but it boils down to the fact that you can't have a pool of LP money being the counterparty providing 0 slippage trading at large size the pool will get arbed to zero eventually. the current footgun likely means usage dwindles rapidly but even if PAPER was transferrable i feel strongly it was doomed from the outset and oh, btw even the non-transferability of PAPER does NOT guarantee someone doesn't make a synthetic perp or prediction market that would benefit an attacker enough to establish the mechanic papertrade is currently trying to avoid anyway --- a reasonable assumption in any serious trading (and especially shark-infested quant trading) is if you give someone an edge, they will exploit to the maximum extent possible until all of the money has been transferred from your wallet into theirs it might not happen today, or tomorrow, but it will happen oi caps were never a realistic solution, although that's what jez DMd me they were implementing (right after he unfollowed me for posting about the protocol design flaw) whack-a-mole efforts and wallet blacklisting also not a solution and neither of those is sybil resistant there is no solution other than a fundamental redesign of the protocol. but if you can't provide massive size at 0 slippage, you don't get the cartoonishly large metrics, and the hairbrained experiment is less enticing to avg retail participant --- and yet here we are with shocked pikachu faces and $2,000 trousers sucks that people are getting hurt again. and it shouldn't be on them to understand edge case mechanics that put their funds at risk --- ps this is the 2nd time i've pointed out an arb embedded in a mechanism designed by jez, the 1st being the multi-million dollar Lighter funding rate rebate where funding losses got refunded the arb was to open long+short legs on the same asset on separate accounts and collect risk-free funding loss refunds on the losing leg, delta neutral. know 1 party who made 6 figures on this!

if true this is a serious error in protocol design the root problem: someone with a large Papertrade position can benefit disproportionately by moving the underlying reference market, BTC or ETH on Hyperliquid core please forgive crudeness / errors but this this is how it works: papertrade allows you to execute up to $10M at hyperliquid mid price (halfway between top bid and ask for BTC or ETH), and papertrade's LP is your counterparty directly so here's the arb, by way of example: 1) load up 10 Papertrade wallets with 100K USDC each 2) put on 10 separate 100x leveraged $10M ETH shorts on Papertrade, adding up to a total $100M short. the key here is there is NO SLIPPAGE on Papertrade since it just hardcoded executes at mid using hyperliquid prices as reference px! 3) next - separately, market sell $20M ETH on Hyperliquid core, causing the actual ETH market to drop 15bps 4) you make $100M*15bps=$150,000 profit on your Papertrade shorts 5) close the Papertrade position, and you can even long $20M on Papertrade here to be net flat vs the $20M HL short and slowly TWAP out of your HL short if you want 6) return to step 2, repeat this is obviously pretty bad if this is what's happening

jeff hitting em with the darth vader sleds

O(2^0.487669n)

"unresolved vector" jesus fucking christ guys docs.papertrade.xyz/#/how/ri…