Trendaavat aiheet
#
Bonk Eco continues to show strength amid $USELESS rally
#
Pump.fun to raise $1B token sale, traders speculating on airdrop
#
Boop.Fun leading the way with a new launchpad on Solana.
小人物
Every day in the industry, we see announcements of various business collaborations, but in reality, many of them are just attempts to ride the wave, with little actual benefit to the project's business model.
From a business perspective, collaboration between two projects should involve complementarity and mutual enhancement. For example, the recent collaboration between Sei and MetaMask can be considered a good model of cooperation.
Regardless of what people say about MetaMask, its user base is substantial, and Sei is currently the fastest EVM. After the collaboration, both Sei's customer acquisition and MetaMask's transaction volume and fees should see an increase.
Of course, in terms of reputation and strength, MetaMask integrating Sei indeed reflects that Sei has developed quite well over the past year or two.
A good collaboration must find complementary partners, leveraging each other's strengths to create a sustainable growth flywheel.
4,06K
Airdrops, do project teams really want to give them out?
Sometimes I wonder, do those projects that shout about community first really want to distribute airdrops to the community?
The answer is quite harsh: in the entire closed loop of VC coins, the vast majority of project teams are simply unwilling to give airdrops to the community.
So why do they give them at all? It’s driven by the need for profit realization:
First, it’s a necessity for exchanges; they require community participation so that retail investors in the secondary market will buy in. Whether the data is real or not doesn’t matter, as long as it looks good on the surface.
Second, airdrops are actually a form of indirect financing. For example, the dreams of getting rich that people didn’t achieve on arb or stk will shift to linea. User attention, tx, and tvl are all part of the valuation, which becomes a means for projects to increase revenue, while also making investors feel that our narrative is sound.
From the perspective of human nature and interests, most project teams actually do not intend to give out airdrops, which explains why there are so many insider trading cases. Project teams play the role of the community and then take away some of the airdrop chips, after all, they set the rules themselves.
Once you understand this, you’ll know:
As VC coins gradually decline, the space for airdrops will become increasingly narrow, requiring more specialization, continuous dynamic games, and even rights protection to pressure exchanges;
And this will always be an asymmetric game where we are in the light, and the other party is always in the dark.
23,21K
The essence of insider information is the precise hunting of air coins against the U you hold.
1. Since I figured this out, I've lost a lot less money.
2. Various forms of insider information: for example, having already signed contracts with major exchanges; meme stronghold background, preparing several million to market and pump; it has just begun.
3. Most of it is a pre-written script. For the market makers, the chips are printed at zero cost, and the core goal is singular: to sell the printed chips at the highest possible price and as many as possible.
4. Understanding the third point means you must remember: the market and the market makers are always adversaries, it's a zero-sum game. Even if you help shout out trades, it's just a temporary alliance; when distributing, they are unlikely to tell you to run first.
5. Whether it's VC coins or the "insider" of memes, you need to clarify one thing: when the market maker calls you, is it because they see your ability to bring in sales; or do they simply think you're a good person and want you to invest; or are they just eyeing your capital?
6. Dating the market maker, from above water to below. Some people indeed made money early on by following the market maker, but as they made money, they fell in love: bro, hold steady, to the moon! As a result, they went from floating profits to being buried underwater. You gained companionship, and the market maker realized their profits.
7. In this game, the only existing "insider" is based on your understanding of the market maker's strength, strategy, and how big of a market they want to create, allowing for an information arbitrage.
So-called insider information is not some rare news; it is merely a tool in the process of chip distribution.
40,64K
The essence of insider information is the precise hunting of air coins against the USDT in your hands.
1. Ever since I understood this point, I have lost a lot less money.
2. Various forms of insider information: for example, having already signed contracts with major exchanges; meme strongholds preparing several million for market-making and pump; it has just begun.
3. Most of it is a pre-written script. For the market makers, the chips are printed at zero cost, and the core goal is singular: to sell the printed air at the highest possible price and as much as possible.
4. Understanding the third point means you must remember: the market and the market makers are always adversaries, it's a zero-sum game. Even if you help shout out trades, it's just a temporary alliance; when distributing, they are unlikely to tell you to run first.
5. Whether it's VC coins or the "insider" of memes, you need to clarify one thing: when the market maker calls you, is it for your ability to bring in funds; or simply because they think you're a good person and want you to invest; or are they just eyeing your capital.
6. Dating a market maker, from above water to below. Some people indeed made money early on by following the market maker, but as they made money, they fell in love: bro, hold steady, to the moon! As a result, they went from floating profits to being buried underwater. You gained companionship, and the market maker realized their profits.
7. In this game, the only existing "insider information" is making an arbitrage based on your understanding of the market maker's strength, strategy, and how big of a market they want to create.
So-called insider information is not some rare news; it is merely a tool in the process of chip distribution.
778
It turns out that what the market lacks is not funds, but new narratives (scams).
Here are a few points of information:
1. 50% presale
2. LP only adds 5%
3. The more I look, the more it resembles an upgraded version of ibrl; I really can't figure out where I stand anymore, and I'm hesitant to bet on human nature.
4. Is it now only a gamble on whether the project team will show mercy and return a bit more of the money that has gone into their pockets?
11,14K
Synchronizing several key changes:
1. From the data of the past ten days, it can be seen that the market makers are not very willing to create large fluctuations for liquidation; they have been consistently supporting the market, with a net inflow of 1.6M over the last ten days.
2. The reason for such a large net inflow without much price increase is partly due to the previously added unilateral pool of coins. Currently, the ratio of coins in the unilateral pool to SOL has decreased from 4.5:1 to 2.7:1. On the other hand, SOL has dropped in price.
3. The original project team dumped 1.3M ten days ago, and there is currently about 1% of the chips left, with the remaining chips added to the pool.
4. The most turbulent times are probably over; let's wait for the flowers to bloom.
28.7.2025
Update $pythia's latest views:
1. Last week, $pythia experienced a lot of turnover at the 100M position, and many people's take profit positions were at 100M, which is estimated to be in a hurry to smash the market, and the first two days of breaking through 100M were still direct, probably a few M of goods.
When so many people sold on the 21st and 22nd, there was a net inflow of almost 2M, and when the 23rd banker changed its strategy and began to wash, it is estimated that it also felt that there were too many bullets, after all, it has spent more than 10M so far.
I thought I had to wash it for at least a day or two, but I pulled the pool and pulled it to 100M in seconds.
The reason why the wash is so urgent and quickly pulls back, @druzbtc said to me that many players who play this game can't bear too much fluctuations, so they won't wash too deeply.
2. This month is likely to be washed and shocked, it can't fall down, and it can't rise, this time is to wash out what can't be held, because they hang a unilateral pool, so many people will most likely not buy, or even sell.
Interestingly, they don't seem to need any players in the currency circle to buy this plate, basically the banker himself pulls and offline customers buy, which has the advantage of less volatility and more stability.
I have always thought that this game is not cost-effective, we don't understand that it is possible that someone will pick them up in a higher position, we just need to sit firmly, hoping that after washing in the next few days, August will come to a new height. 🤣
5,43K
Yesterday, I saw many comments in the comment section expressing that no matter how the mechanisms change, this market still revolves around gathering groups to exploit retail investors and pseudo-innovation.
I can actually understand this; it reflects the current state of the industry.
However, many people's understanding of trust is merely a slogan at the level of narrative innovation, which is a kind of belief that lacks practical grounding.
This is fundamentally different from the trust I discuss.
The trust I talk about is a verifiable business model, one that has specific points of application and practical measures.
This trust flywheel requires the initiators to first stake their own resources, to lead by example in practicing and bearing the costs of trust, for the flywheel to truly be realized.
It can actually be quite simple to calculate: if this trust-based flywheel becomes ineffective, who suffers the most?
It will definitely be the initiators of the flywheel, as they will lose the community and their partners, rendering all early investments wasted.
So at least one fact remains: early believers will not be let down, because that would be a highly negative expected value (EV) action.
Trust is not about what you say, but about what you actually do.
Therefore, verification isn't that complicated; you just need to see if they are continuously investing in trust. After all, anything can be packaged in this market, but only real monetary stakes cannot be faked.
In the current environment where trust is collapsing, there are still entities like @unicornverse_io willing to stand up with their real names and invest real money to uphold the banner of trust, which is quite rare.
For us, there is no downside, but if this difficult yet correct path is truly successful, it may bring a glimmer of hope to this industry.
4.8. klo 11.14
The Disappearing Trust
Recently, I've been repeatedly pondering a question: Why did VC coins crash?
On the surface, it may seem like a lack of sentiment and poor liquidity; but fundamentally, it's the trust mechanism of the entire industry that is collapsing.
Any project is basically composed of these four roles: the project party, investors, market makers, and the community. Theoretically, these four should be co-building and co-winning;
But the reality is increasingly resembling a zero-sum game of "whoever runs faster wins."
Everyone is wary of each other, distrustful, and even willing to deceive one another just to run faster.
This structural issue not only fails to create trust but also amplifies human weaknesses: greed, shortsightedness, and opportunism.
Over time, we also come to accept that this industry is filled with deception, forgetting that the core value of blockchain is not competition, but consensus and trust.
Many people only see trust collapsing, but overlook a simple truth: anything that can collapse downwards can also rise upwards.
Therefore, what we need to further contemplate is: how should trust among these four parties be built?
The answer probably lies not within the four roles themselves, but in stepping outside a single role perspective to construct a trust relationship based on positive-sum games from a mechanism standpoint.
From a business model perspective, the key is to find that fulcrum that carries trust and develop it into a core capability, then build an iterative feedback mechanism around this fulcrum.
Among these four roles, the only ones truly capable of building a trust fulcrum are the investors and market makers.
So, how should these two fulcrums leverage the trust flywheel?
With these two roles as the fulcrum of core capabilities, the stronger the capability, the more value it can create for the community. By sharing early profits with the community, those who believe can earn money, thus generating more and more value resonance, ultimately pushing the community to give back to its core capabilities.
Over time, more and more project parties will actively seek cooperation, and there will be real choices in selecting quality projects.
Capability brings value, value brings trust, and trust in turn reinforces capability. This may be the solution that aligns with business logic.
8,63K
Culturally influenced, Chinese founders have consistently been world-class leaders in application layer innovation (micro-innovations that are close to user needs and rapidly iterated) and operational efficiency (user growth and refined operations).
In contrast, foreigners tend to focus more on foundational technologies and underlying architectures. This phenomenon is evident not only in web2 but also in web3.
4.8. klo 09.12
Security isn’t a feature. It’s the foundation.
Proud to see @OKX Wallet ranked #1 on @CertiK’s Skynet Leaderboard for overall security score.
Self-custody only works if users can trust the tech.
We’re building the most secure wallet in Web3.
3,98K
The Disappearing Trust
Recently, I've been repeatedly pondering a question: Why did VC coins crash?
On the surface, it may seem like a lack of sentiment and poor liquidity; but fundamentally, it's the trust mechanism of the entire industry that is collapsing.
Any project is basically composed of these four roles: the project party, investors, market makers, and the community. Theoretically, these four should be co-building and co-winning;
But the reality is increasingly resembling a zero-sum game of "whoever runs faster wins."
Everyone is wary of each other, distrustful, and even willing to deceive one another just to run faster.
This structural issue not only fails to create trust but also amplifies human weaknesses: greed, shortsightedness, and opportunism.
Over time, we also come to accept that this industry is filled with deception, forgetting that the core value of blockchain is not competition, but consensus and trust.
Many people only see trust collapsing, but overlook a simple truth: anything that can collapse downwards can also rise upwards.
Therefore, what we need to further contemplate is: how should trust among these four parties be built?
The answer probably lies not within the four roles themselves, but in stepping outside a single role perspective to construct a trust relationship based on positive-sum games from a mechanism standpoint.
From a business model perspective, the key is to find that fulcrum that carries trust and develop it into a core capability, then build an iterative feedback mechanism around this fulcrum.
Among these four roles, the only ones truly capable of building a trust fulcrum are the investors and market makers.
So, how should these two fulcrums leverage the trust flywheel?
With these two roles as the fulcrum of core capabilities, the stronger the capability, the more value it can create for the community. By sharing early profits with the community, those who believe can earn money, thus generating more and more value resonance, ultimately pushing the community to give back to its core capabilities.
Over time, more and more project parties will actively seek cooperation, and there will be real choices in selecting quality projects.
Capability brings value, value brings trust, and trust in turn reinforces capability. This may be the solution that aligns with business logic.
214,82K
Johtavat
Rankkaus
Suosikit