A mega-thread on why now is a seriously good time to build on NEAR Intents 🧵

Sorry for confusion, I meant that 'we are building the infrastructure that makes it real.'

When the President plays fast and loose with “emergency powers,” it’s small businesses like Learning Resources and @hand2mind that pay the price. As the Supreme Court heard oral arguments today in Learning Resources v. Trump, Chairman and CEO Rich Woldenberg sat down with NCLA’s

We have a prototype of AI agent that stops you from doing stupid financial decisions like this one. Should we ship it in prod?

NODL

We too

3 Small AI Stocks Ready to Explode (All Under $20)

nillions

The core value of the blockchain is verifiability. Transparency is the implementation detail, because we didn't know how to provide verifiability in the other way. This will change soon.

Once this is done, we will be able to calculate the NEAR Protocol revenue (and perhaps other protocols revenue) from the NEAR Intents.

We are figuring out compliant way to properly handle contract and distribution fees that are intended to go towards NEAR protocol. Our intention is to keep NEAR Intents and the associated fees completely aligned with the decentralised nature of NEAR and other blockchains.

The @ATGUSAMade Buddy Sled is a specific solution I kneeded for a school I’ve been helping. For my own workouts, I use the resisted treadmill - and all my shoes and equipment are on sale for the holidays! This video also covers the history of sled dragging:

You should think about contract fees as the absolute minimum that goes into NEAR. While everything else is extra. Keeping low contract fees and adjusting sharing of the distribution fees helps NEAR Intents to cater to many partners.

All the above means that Uniswap has 0 flows into the $UNI token. From my point of view, this number is what should be named protocol revenue.

To compare: Uniswap has 0 contract fees, MM fees are open (depend on the pools, usually 0.3%) and go directly to LPs; https://t.co/MqhSkRSpvm FE implements the distribution fee of 0.25% on specific assets. This fee goest to the Uniswap Labs (not token holders).

https://t.co/n8jRoAGvEl implements distribution fees of 0.2% for non-stablecoin swaps. These fees are intended to be accumulated into the flow to the NEAR protocol.

Why would the US Government allow Argentina Beef to be labeled as “Product of the USA?”? The establishment GOP got wiped out in the 2025 elections because they have abandoned fiscal conservatism. Plus a deep dive on how cattle farmers are being decimated by the political class in

For authorised partners this number can go both up and down depending on many factors, mainly the business needs of the partner.

The total 'flow into the NEAR protocol' consists of the contract fees and a share of the distribution fees. The split is usually dynamic and varies per partner. There's a default 0.1% distribution fee that is set up for all unauthorised integrations with 1CS.

MM fees are not included in the dashboard, because 1) they are not on-chain 2) it is impossible to calculate those. MMs can use different hedging strategies or accumulate one-sided positions. It's their know-how and they won't share it with us.

Another portion of the fees (0.001%) is instilled in the smart contracts and always goes to the NEAR Protocol. Right now this fee is set up to reduce errors during integrations. We can call this contract fees. (Yes, this is not protocol fees, see below)

Blameless, Not

A portion of the fees is going to the front-ends / aggregators — all the parties that guide users to the protocol contracts. We call these distribution fees. We see for some swaps these fees are more than 1%.

We think of the fee number in the same way how DEXes and Lending protocols: fees is everything that users are paying to achieve the goal. Fees must be trackable onchain.

The familiar @Dune dashboard is extended with the fees numbers, please track it if you're interested: https://t.co/tpGZ3QJn1P

Total generated fees of NEAR Intents is $5.4M as of today. A thread on this topic.

"What's the best tool for contractors to be able to organize their job sites?"