Connect with us

Crypto World

Zora moves onto Solana with “attention markets” for trading internet trends

Published

on

(Zora)

On-chain social platform and decentralized protocol Zora is making a decisive shift beyond its non-fungible tokens (NFT) and creator roots with the launch of “attention markets” on Solana, a product that allows users to trade tokens tied to internet trends, memes and cultural moments.

The feature, unveiled Feb. 17, lets anyone create a new market for 1 SOL. Once live, users can buy and sell positions on whether a topic will gain or lose traction across social media.

Instead of wagering on elections or macro data, traders speculate on buzz itself — such as hashtags, viral narratives, even broad themes like “AI girlfriend” or “bitcoin.”

The design leans heavily into Solana’s strengths. Fast block times and low transaction costs make it easier to support rapid price updates and frequent trading, which are essential for markets built around fleeting online momentum.

Advertisement

Initial activity was limited, however. The primary “attentionmarkets” token briefly touched roughly $70,000 in market capitalization, with around $200,000 in trading volume. Most other trend markets struggled to attract meaningful liquidity, with few crossing the $10,000 mark in their first day.

(Zora)

Percentage swings were sharp, though largely driven by thin order books rather than sustained demand.

Zora was among the breakout applications on Coinbase’s Layer 2 Base network in the past few years. It launched its ZORA token there in April, and helped roll out Creator Coins tied to Base profiles in July, a push that briefly helped Base overtake Solana in daily token creation.

Creator coins are tokens tied to an individual creator’s online profile, brand or community. Think of them as tradable “shares” in a person’s internet presence.

On platforms like Zora and Base, a creator coin could be automatically generated from a user’s profile. Fans could buy the coin to signal support, gain social clout, or speculate that the creator’s popularity would grow. As more people bought in, the price could rise, and interest faded, it could fall.

Advertisement

As such, some in the Base community saw the new “attention markets” product as a pivot away from that momentum.

Jacek Trociński, the developer behind Base memecoin Degen, called it “really disappointing” to see Zora move to Solana. Veil Cash builder Apex777.eth was harsher, accusing Zora of “extracting” value from Base before switching networks.

Meanwhile, Base creator Jesse Pollak said Zora’s creator tools remain “fully operational” on the network.

As speculation moves beyond price charts and into cultural data, platforms like Zora are testing whether attention itself can become memetic and deeply tied to the internet’s real-time financial pulse.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Crypto World

$1.78M ‘Vibe-Coded’ Oracle Bug Puts AI-Coauthored Contracts Under Scrutiny

Published

on

$1.78M ‘Vibe-Coded’ Oracle Bug Puts AI-Coauthored Contracts Under Scrutiny

Moonwell, a decentralized finance (DeFi) lending protocol deployed on Base and Optimism, was exploited for about $1.78 million after a pricing oracle for Coinbase Wrapped Staked ETH (cbETH) returned a value of about $1.12 instead of $2,200, creating a mispricing that attackers were able to use for profit.

Moonwell said in an incident post-mortem that a governance proposal executed on Sunday misconfigured the cbETH oracle by using the cbETH/ETH exchange rate alone, causing the system to report cbETH at about $1.12. The protocol said liquidation bots and opportunistic borrowers exploited the mispricing, leaving roughly $1.78 million in bad debt.

The pull requests for the affected contracts show multiple commits co-authored by Anthropic’s Claude Opus 4.6, prompting security auditor Pashov to publicly flag the incident as an example of artificial intelligence-written or AI-assisted Solidity backfiring. 

Speaking to Cointelegraph about the incident, he said that he had linked the case to Claude because there were multiple commits in the pull requests that were co-authored by Claude, meaning that “the developer was using Claude to write the code, and this has led to the vulnerability.”

Advertisement

Pashov cautioned, however, against treating the flaw as uniquely AI-driven. He described the oracle issue as the kind of mistake “even a senior Solidity developer could have made,” arguing that the real problem was a lack of sufficiently rigorous checks and end-to-end validation.

Vulnerable code led to Moonwell exploit. Source: Pashov

Initially, he said that he believed there had been no testing or audit at all, but later acknowledged that the team said it had unit and integration tests in a separate pull request and had commissioned an audit from Halborn. 

In his view, the mispricing “could have been caught with an integration test, a proper one, integrating with the blockchain,” but he declined to criticise other security firms directly.

Related: How South Korea is using AI to detect crypto market manipulation

Small loss, big governance questions

The dollar amount of the exploit is small compared to some of DeFi’s largest incidents, such as the Ronin bridge exploit in March 2022, where attackers stole more than $600 million, or other nine-figure bridge and lending protocol hacks

Advertisement

What makes Moonwell notable is the mix of AI co-authorship, a basic-seeming price configuration failure on a major asset, and existing audits and tests that failed to catch it. 

Pashov said his own company would not fundamentally change its process, but if code appeared “vibe coded,” his team would “have a bit more wide open eyes” and expect a higher density of low-hanging issues, even though this particular oracle bug “was not that easy” to spot.

“Vibe coding” vs disciplined AI use

Fraser Edwards, co-founder and CEO of cheqd, a decentralized identity infrastructure provider, told Cointelegraph that the debate around vibe coding masks “two very different interpretations” of how AI is used. 

Related: How AI crypto trading will make and break human roles

Advertisement

On one side, he said, are non-technical founders prompting AI to generate code they cannot independently review; on the other, experienced developers using AI to accelerate refactors, pattern exploration and testing inside a mature engineering process.

AI-assisted development “can be valuable, particularly at the MVP [minimal viable product] stage,” he noted, but “should not be treated as a shortcut to production-ready infrastructure,” especially in capital-intensive systems like DeFi.

Edwards argued that all AI-generated smart contract code should be treated as untrusted input, subject to strict version control, clear code ownership, multi-person peer review and advanced testing, especially around high-risk areas such as access controls, oracle and pricing logic, and upgrade mechanisms.

“Ultimately, responsible AI integration comes down to governance and discipline,” he said, with clear review gates, separation between code generation and validation, and an assumption that any contract deployed in an adversarial environment may contain latent risk.

Advertisement

Magazine: South Korea gets rich from crypto… North Korea gets weapons