<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
    <channel>
        <title>0xAc56</title>
        <link>https://paragraph.com/@0xAc5654216930415043b535499d5acea072721f80</link>
        <description>undefined</description>
        <lastBuildDate>Sun, 04 Oct 2026 18:55:59 GMT</lastBuildDate>
        <docs>https://validator.w3.org/feed/docs/rss2.html</docs>
        <generator>https://github.com/jpmonette/feed</generator>
        <language>en</language>
        <copyright>All rights reserved</copyright>
        <item>
            <link>https://paragraph.com/@0xAc5654216930415043b535499d5acea072721f80/bP88Jpblt1X7EeKp6Z2w</link>
            <guid>bP88Jpblt1X7EeKp6Z2w</guid>
            <pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2026 07:53:42 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[In NFT marketplaces such as Blur, when a user sees an indicator like “transaction pending” or “transaction in progress,” it reflects real-time monitoring of the blockchain mempool rather than final on-chain confirmation. The mempool (memory pool) is a temporary holding area maintained by blockchain nodes. When a user signs and broadcasts a transaction—such as purchasing or listing an NFT—the transaction is first propagated across peer-to-peer nodes. At this stage, it has not yet been included...]]></description>
            <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In NFT marketplaces such as Blur, when a user sees an indicator like “transaction pending” or “transaction in progress,” it reflects real-time monitoring of the blockchain mempool rather than final on-chain confirmation.</p><p>The <strong>mempool (memory pool)</strong> is a temporary holding area maintained by blockchain nodes. When a user signs and broadcasts a transaction—such as purchasing or listing an NFT—the transaction is first propagated across peer-to-peer nodes. At this stage, it has not yet been included in a block. Instead, it sits in the mempool waiting for a validator (in Proof-of-Stake networks like Ethereum) to select it for inclusion in the next block.</p><p>From a technical perspective, NFT platforms connect to full nodes or infrastructure providers (e.g., Ethereum RPC endpoints) that expose mempool data. When a user submits a transaction via their wallet (such as MetaMask), the platform receives the transaction hash immediately after broadcast. The frontend then queries the node using JSON-RPC methods such as <code>eth_getTransactionByHash</code>. If the transaction exists in the mempool but does not yet have a block number assigned, it is considered “pending.”</p><p>At this point, the UI updates to display a status such as “Transaction Pending” or “Processing.” The marketplace may also monitor gas price dynamics, nonce sequencing, and potential transaction replacement (e.g., if the user speeds up or cancels the transaction using a higher gas fee). Since Ethereum allows transactions with the same nonce to be replaced if the gas fee is increased, the platform must track mempool changes carefully.</p><p>Blur-like platforms often go further by using websocket subscriptions (e.g., <code>eth_subscribe</code> with <code>newPendingTransactions</code>) to listen for real-time mempool events. This allows the interface to instantly reflect that a transaction has entered the network, even before confirmation. Additionally, they may simulate the transaction off-chain to estimate its success probability and detect potential reverts.</p><p>Once a validator includes the transaction in a block, the node returns a block number and receipt via <code>eth_getTransactionReceipt</code>. The platform then updates the status from “pending” to “confirmed.” Some platforms wait for multiple block confirmations to reduce reorg risk before marking the trade as finalized.</p><p>In summary, when an NFT platform displays “transaction in progress,” it is technically monitoring mempool state, transaction hash existence, gas inclusion likelihood, and block confirmation status in real time. The mempool acts as the transitional layer between user intent (signed transaction) and final blockchain settlement.</p>]]></content:encoded>
            <author>0xac5654216930415043b535499d5acea072721f80@newsletter.paragraph.com (0xAc56)</author>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[writer coin]]></title>
            <link>https://paragraph.com/@0xAc5654216930415043b535499d5acea072721f80/writer-coin</link>
            <guid>py06zUQL2hVxD2KOCeH4</guid>
            <pubDate>Sat, 06 Dec 2025 02:11:13 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[A “writer coin” imagines each journalist as their own miniature economy. Instead of subscribing to The New York Times or supporting an entire platform like Substack, readers would invest in the writer themselves. The more popular a writer becomes, the more their coin is worth; the value rises as readership grows, producing financial incentives for quality content and sustained engagement. It is essentially equity in a person instead of a company. In theory, this encourages a healthier relatio...]]></description>
            <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A “writer coin” imagines each journalist as their own miniature economy. Instead of subscribing to The New York Times or supporting an entire platform like Substack, readers would invest in the writer themselves. The more popular a writer becomes, the more their coin is worth; the value rises as readership grows, producing financial incentives for quality content and sustained engagement. It is essentially equity in a person instead of a company. In theory, this encourages a healthier relationship between writer and reader: supporters feel like stakeholders rather than passive consumers, and writers get access to upfront capital that allows them to pursue investigations, long-term research, or niche interests.</p><p>But as appealing as this sounds, writer coins also reflect the market logic that has damaged journalism in the first place. Audiences do not necessarily reward what is most important; they reward what is most engaging, most entertaining, or most aligned with their existing worldviews. A reporter trying to investigate corruption in municipal zoning laws will almost always lose, financially, to someone writing spicy opinion takes or culture-war commentary. We already know this from social media: virality is a terrible compass for civic value. Writer coins, if left to pure market dynamics, could accelerate that trend rather than reverse it.</p>]]></content:encoded>
            <author>0xac5654216930415043b535499d5acea072721f80@newsletter.paragraph.com (0xAc56)</author>
        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>