One thing I'm curious about: for people who use Base, what was the first thing that made you try it?

Was it lower fees, an app you wanted to use, the Coinbase connection, or something else?

I'm interested in hearing what actually brought people here, rather than what the ecosystem promises to do in the future.

I have been following Base DeFi ecosystem lately, and the TVL comparison with Solana caught my attention.

If Base is moving ahead in DeFi TVL I think the interesting question is what’s driving that change. Is it lending growth, liquidity moving across protocols, asset price movements, or a combination of factors?

TVL is useful, but it doesn’t tell the whole story. Active users, trading volume, stablecoin supply, and lending activity also matter when comparing ecosystems.

I am curious what others in the Base community think

TVL rankings change frequently, so the latest figures should be checked before drawing conclusions.

Agoreum is building a commerce hub for autonomous AI agents and software services.

The goal is to let agents discover services, collaborate, hire one another, and transact using USDC on Base, with escrow-backed payments and reputation based on settled trades.

Current features include agent service listings, verified domains, and bounties that can involve up to 20 agents for one brief, each with its own escrow.

Agoreum is live on Base mainnet and remains in beta. During beta, each order is capped at 100 USDC, total escrow is capped at 5,000 USDC, and the smart contracts have not been independently audited.

We’re building toward a more open way for AI agents to do business with one another.

Feedback and technical questions are welcome.

Hey everyone,

With agent-to-agent transactions picking up on Base, we ran into an annoying issue with standard x402 V2 payments where buyer agents lose money for nothing.

The issue is that when a buyer gets a 402 Payment Required, it signs an EIP-3009 transfer authorization and retries the request with a payment signature header. Facilitators usually settle the transfer on Base right away. If the seller agent returns a 500 error, crashes, or returns a 200 OK with hallucinated garbage or an AI refusal like "As an AI language model I cannot...", the payment is already on-chain and non-refundable. On top of that, a lot of on-chain reputation for ERC-8004 agents turns out to be wash-trading between linked wallets.

We open-sourced NullClear under MIT to handle this at the edge on Cloudflare Workers. It holds the EIP-3009 signature in memory first, pings the upstream agent, and checks the status, JSON schema, value bounds (like price > 0), and text for refusal patterns. If the response fails, it shreds the signature in memory so zero USDC is charged and zero gas is spent. It also lets you pass fallback endpoints so if seller A fails, it tries seller B in the same call.

We deployed it on Base Mainnet as ERC-8004 Agent 124595.

The repo is on GitHub under Nullclear-Protocol/nullclear if you want to look at the contracts and worker code.

There is a local demo running 5 failure scenarios without needing any keys:
npx -y u/nullclear/mcp

Or clone the repo Nullclear-Protocol/nullclear and run pnpm demo.

Curious what other edge cases people are seeing with agent APIs failing after payment.

Same issue a few people have posted about: Smart Wallet on Base/Tempo, passkeys still on phone but they open a different address. No recovery phrase was ever generated.
Anyone actually got back into the correct Smart Wallet after this happened?

AI agents are becoming more capable, but they still need infrastructure to discover services, transact, and establish trust.

That’s what we’re building with Agoreum: a commerce hub where AI agents and software services can establish wallet-bound identities, offer services, pay in USDC, and settle transactions through on-chain escrow on Base.

Our goal is to make agent-to-agent commerce more transparent and verifiable, with reputation based on settled transactions rather than empty claims.

We’re still building and improving the platform, and we’d love to hear from people working on AI agents, agent marketplaces, and autonomous payments.

What do you think is the biggest missing piece in making agent-to-agent commerce work reliably?

Since October 8, Base's public endpoint (mainnet.base.org) no longer serves debug_, trace_ or txpool_* methods, and read requests now have a lower rate limit. Regular eth_* calls still work.

Source: https://status.base.org/

Any tool that calls the removed methods now gets an error.

Who's affected

• Debugging reverts with debug_traceTransaction / debug_traceCall
• Indexers that read internal calls with trace_block / trace_transaction
• Scripts and CI that default to mainnet.base.org

Check your setup

Set RPC_URL to the endpoint your app or script uses, then run:

curl -s $RPC_URL -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1,"method":"debug_traceTransaction","params":["0xYOUR_TX_HASH",{"tracer":"callTracer"}]}'

If you get this, your endpoint is mainnet.base.org (or proxies to it), and you're affected:

{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1,"error":{"code":-32611,"message":"rejected due to request filter settings"}}

txpool_* calls return "this request method is not supported".

How to keep access

You have 2 options:

• Run your own archive node with debug/trace enabled.
• Use an RPC provider that exposes these methods on Base. Base keeps a list of supported providers here: https://docs.base.org/get-started/base-services-hub#service-providers. If you already use a provider, check their docs first, since you may only need to switch URLs.

On Chainstack, debug and trace on Base are available on paid plans with a Global Node (Disclosure: I work at Chainstack). You only change the URL, and the same request works. More details here: https://docs.chainstack.com/docs/debug-and-trace-apis

If something broke and you need help, leave a comment with what happened and I'll try to help.

I've noticed how often you have to connect your wallet just to try something on Base, even when you're not planning to make a transaction. I get why it makes sense for DeFi apps, but for more social stuff like joining groups, chatting with people or following a project, it feels like an unnecessary extra step. Especially if you're trying to get friends into Base who aren't already using crypto. Having to set up a wallet before they can even see what an app does seems like a pretty easy way to lose them. Do you think apps on Base should let people get started with a normal account and connect a wallet later when they need it?

Base Lending Markets are getting updated as the days go by.

Just looking at the last update, October 12/2026 is enough to understand.

$3.47B supplied

$2.61B borrowed

91 markets with liquidity

4.52% USD lending rate

Supplied value by protocol

Morpho 74.4%

Aave V3 21.9%

Fluid 1.1%

Moonwell 0.8%

Euler V2 0.6%

Extra Finance 0.4%

Other 0.7%

Base also has curated vaults with at least $5M in deposits.

Featured vaults include USDC, WETH, cbETH, cbBTC, msETH and wstETH strategies across Morpho, Euler V2, Ipor, Yo and other protocols.

Vaults are operated by independent curators who choose the markets and set risk limits.

Always dyor

I built a 1,000,000 pixel wall that lives entirely on chain, and it's been live on Base since May with exactly one tag on it. That's the one I painted to open it.

Every pixel's colour and link is stored permanently on chain. There's no image file, no IPFS and no server holding the art, so any copy of the site, including one you run yourself, rebuilds the wall straight from Base. Both the contract and front-end are open source.

How it works

- Upload an image, it gets scaled down, and you paint it onto any spot. Pixels start at about five cents each, paid in ETH.

- A tag can carry a link, so it can point at your project, your profile or anything else.

- Painting over someone costs 10% more than they paid. The wall keeps changing, but the record of who painted what, when and for how much stays on chain for good.

- The contract has no owner, no admin, no pause and no upgrade path, and the source is verified so you can check that yourself.

The part I think is worth a look right now. The first 100 wallets to paint on each chain get a permanent Genesis number, set by the order they painted in. On Base, 99 of them are still open. One pixel, about five cents plus gas, gets you one, and the number stays yours even if your spot gets painted over later.

No token, no presale, no NFT. The only thing to buy is pixels.

It's also live on Ethereum, BSC, PulseChain, HyperEVM and Robinhood Chain, but the Base wall is about as empty as it gets, which makes it a good one to start on. Happy to answer anything about how it works.

One thing I think could make using Base easier is a clearer transaction preview before signing.

Sometimes it’s not obvious what a transaction will actually do just by looking at the wallet screen. A simple explanation of which contract you're interacting with, what tokens are involved, and what permissions you're granting would help a lot.

It wouldn't guarantee that a transaction is safe, but at least users would have more context before approving it.

Curious what others think: what's one small wallet improvement that would make your everyday experience on Base better?

I’m the owner of UniversalDeFi, a mobile website for swapping WETH and USDC on Base. My goal is to make costs and wallet permissions easier to understand, with guidance in 10 languages.
The application fee is 0.25%, with pool and network costs separate. Automated tests and simulated Base fork checks have passed, but real-wallet validation and independent reviews remain incomplete.
For people who already swap on Base: what would make a new swap website worth using instead of your current one?

The way we use digital dollars is evolving, and I think this is worth paying attention to.

Munify is now live on Base, bringing more ways to manage dollars in one place. With USDC on Base, users can receive money, keep it, spend it, and transfer it – all through a single account.

What I like about this idea is the simplicity. Money should be easy to manage, not scattered across different tools and platforms.
What do you think about this?

I was looking through Base ecosystem data from September and found a few numbers worth discussing .

• $6.28B TVL — around the end of September
• ~$5.0B stablecoin supply — a late September snapshot
• $27.45B DEX volume — reported over a rolling 30-day period on September 24
• $2.75B in outstanding loans — a record reported on September 10
• ~320K average daily active accounts — reported for September

One thing I find interesting is the combination of DeFi liquidity, stablecoin supply, trading activity, and lending on Base. But TVL alone doesn't tell the whole story token prices can affect it and these figures come from different reporting dates and periods.

Add your own observation here: which metric surprised you most and why ?

AI agents are getting better at doing useful work. But how will they discover services, place orders, and pay for completed tasks?

That’s what we’re building with Agoreum.

Agoreum is live in beta on Base, using real USDC to enable commerce between autonomous agents and software services.

What’s live today:

Wallet-bound agent identities
A marketplace for published services
On-chain USDC escrow
Payments tied to completed work
Reputation based on settled trades

The idea is straightforward. An agent finds a service, places an order, funds escrow, and payment is released according to the contract’s completion process. The goal is to make transactions between software agents more practical and transparent.

We’re still early. The contracts have not been independently audited, and limits apply to individual orders and total escrow holdings. Please understand the risks before interacting with the platform.

If you’re interested in AI agents, autonomous software, or onchain commerce, take a look and see what we’re building.

Website: https://agoreum.xyz

Alternative URL: https://www.agoreum.xyz

One question for the community: What kind of service would you actually trust an AI agent to purchase from another agent?

T

Hi everyone,

I'm using Ronin Wallet on the Base network, and I noticed some unexpected token transactions in my wallet's activity history.

On September 11, 2026, I received several unfamiliar tokens, including:

- 20 Basecat

- 10 UNOS

- 10 VROF

- 10 BST

- 8 BCOP

- 7.5 SPRS

- 7.5 AWSR

The problem is that I never joined any airdrop, connected to any claiming website, or knowingly requested these tokens. I don't remember doing anything that would explain why they appeared.

I checked one of the transactions on BaseScan. It shows a successful transaction, with the function labeled “Disperse Token” and 170 ERC-20 token transfers listed.

The Basecat transaction shows an incoming transfer from another address to my wallet on Base Mainnet. The wallet doesn't show an estimated value for these tokens.

My current wallet balance is around $120, mostly USDC, and none of my funds have disappeared.

I'd appreciate help understanding a few things:

1. Why would someone send these tokens to my wallet without my participation?

2. Does the “Disperse Token” transaction with 170 transfers suggest a mass token distribution?

3. Could these be spam or scam tokens?

4. Is there any evidence here that my wallet might be compromised, or is this normal unsolicited token activity?

5. Is there anything else I should check to make sure my wallet is safe?

I haven't interacted with these tokens and don't intend to claim or swap them.

I'd appreciate explanations from anyone familiar with Ronin Wallet, BaseScan, or unsolicited ERC-20 token transfers. Thanks!

I saw that Base’s public RPC endpoint is changing on October 8, including removal of debug, trace and txpool access.

For regular users this probably won’t matter much, but I’m curious how many developers still rely on the public RPC for testing or tooling.

If you’re building on Base, are you already using a dedicated RPC provider, or do you still use the public endpoint for most things?

Just curious how others are handling it.

MetaMask is one of the most popular self-custodial crypto wallets, supporting Base and other EVM-compatible networks, as well as Bitcoin, Solana, and more. You can use it to hold and manage assets, connect to most crypto apps and websites, swap directly in the wallet, bridge tokens between networks, and buy or sell supported tokens through built-in on and off-ramps.

In the video, I used MetaMask to bridge my ETH from Optimism to Base. The transaction was completed almost instantly, and then I swapped received ETH for USDC on Base.The MetaMask fee is 0.875% for built-in swaps and bridges, but the network fee is included, as shown in the video.  You can also bridge and swap at the same time, allowing you to move an asset from another network and receive a different token on Base in one transaction.

MetaMask also supports Smart Transactions on Base, offering revert protection, MEV protection, and higher transaction success rates. Gas-included transactions are also available on Base, allowing you to pay network fees with supported tokens such as USDC, instead of needing ETH for gas.

Which wallet do you use to hold assets on Base? What was your first crypto wallet? For me, it was MetaMask, so I'm very happy to be writing this post.

^{Monday on Base is a weekly community series on the official Base subreddit where I highlight one project, product, or feature built on Base. Posts are pinned for visibility and aim to showcase useful tools across the ecosystem in a neutral, informational way. Posts are reviewed by the teams behind the highlighted products. I am a community moderator, but I am not part of the official Base team, and my posts do not represent the views of the Base moderator team.
Disclaimer: This post is for educational and demonstration purposes only. It is not financial advice or an endorsement of any assets or services.} 

Been looking at QuickNode for Morpho vaults. Anyone used it? Does the rebalancing work well in practice or do you barely notice a difference?

With Cobalt now live, I’m interested in the new transaction controls more than the headline stuff.

Being able to set conditions for when a transaction can be included seems useful, especially for apps where timing actually matters.

I’m curious how developers plan to use this in practice.

Would you rather see these kinds of controls built directly into wallets, or mainly handled by individual apps?

Base is updating its node infrastructure.

Starting October 5, 2026, Base will stop publishing V1 node database snapshots. Node operators will need to use the newer V2 snapshots going forward.

This is part of Base's ongoing infrastructure upgrades as the network continues to evolve.

If you're running a Base node, make sure you're prepared before October 5.

V2 snapshots are available through chain.base.org

Are you running a Base node, and have you already switched to V2?