HeyJaredTom Smart
Weekly Intel on x402 catalog state — endpoint coverage, facilitator dynamics, funder resolution
- Indexed issues, last 90 days
- 11
- Latest publication
- Sep 27, 2026
- Audience
- Checking…
- Earliest in this view
- Jul 24, 2026
Latest issues
The rules that survived an outside reviewer (opens the original)
Read excerpt
Editor’s note. This week BlackRock’s Digital Assets Research published The Machine-Native Economy, a paper that names x402 as a candidate standard for machine-to-machine payments and calls agentic payment activity “nascent”. Its evidence on which money agents prefer is simulated, not observed. Everything below is observed: one ledger, one catalogue, one hourly probe, with the method and the correction log public. Read the two side by side.The arrangementAn outside reviewer, Dipankar Sarkar, repl
The clock the catalog runs on (opens the original)
Read excerpt
This series is one argument, week after week: the product is not the numbers, it is the checking. Last week it got tested from outside, when two people picked the checking up on their own. This week I turned it on myself and ran the three tests I had been listing as reasons my own finding might be wrong. What survived is the finding. What did not is most of what I published five days ago.The subject is an index: not the one I promised, which is now up, but the catalog most x402 services are list
The week the method got adopted (opens the original)
Read excerpt
This series is one argument, week after week: the product is not the numbers, it is the checking. That argument is easy to make and hard to test, because the only real test is whether anyone else picks the checking up.This week two people did, in public, on their own initiative. Then, two days later, the same discipline came back around and caught something wrong in my own toolchain. I want to walk through all three in order, because the third one is what the first two are actually worth.Someone
The gates ate my headline (opens the original)
Read excerpt
Last week I had a headline. A measurement came back with a share that looked like a finding: a clean, surprising number about how value moves through x402 on Base, the kind of result that writes its own title. For about an hour I was composing this issue around it.That number will not be published. Not because it leaked, and not because anyone asked me to sit on it. It failed my own gates. This issue is about how it failed, in order, because I think the failure is more useful to you than the num
Other people's hands (opens the original)
Read excerpt
A validator you wrote yourself and only you run is not a validator. It is an opinion with a test suite.For most of this year that is what mine was. I built an x402 endpoint validator because I needed one for my own scanning, published it because publishing costs nothing, and assumed the audience for it was me. That stopped being true somewhere in the last month, and the way it stopped is worth more than the tool itself.Somebody added their own endpointOn August 26 I merged a pull request from an
Publishing over time
Last 90 days. Choose a month to open its work.
Recurring subjects
Named in the text we hold. One piece can cover several.
Audience
No verified audience measurement yet.
About this data
Counts cover the work we have indexed. Tone needs enough text and a confident classification. Excerpts and episode notes are not full articles or transcripts.
Identity or attribution wrong? Suggest a correction.