Nothing Research
Verified Creator
multi-strategy venture building alongside founders
3 Following
1.5K+ Followers
390 Liked
48 Shared
See original
Bitcoin's Independence Day
Observations and personal views from Nothing Research Partner 0x_Todd. The following content does not constitute any investment advice.
August 1 is actually a great day for Bitcoin; it is Bitcoin's UASF Day, which can also be called Bitcoin's Independence Day.
Independent from whom? Independent from the mining monopolists.
Time goes back to 2017; if Bitcoin was destined to face a calamity, the summer of 2017 might be that calamity. Bitcoin almost split, and BCH reached as high as 30% of BTC's price.
Bitcoin is different from other blockchains; its upgrades are particularly cautious, and because there is no centralized institution, its upgrades are all soft forks, meaning they are backward compatible.
August 1 is actually a great day for Bitcoin; it is Bitcoin's UASF Day, which can also be called Bitcoin's Independence Day.
Independent from whom? Independent from the mining monopolists.
Time goes back to 2017; if Bitcoin was destined to face a calamity, the summer of 2017 might be that calamity. Bitcoin almost split, and BCH reached as high as 30% of BTC's price.
Bitcoin is different from other blockchains; its upgrades are particularly cautious, and because there is no centralized institution, its upgrades are all soft forks, meaning they are backward compatible.
See original
Solana's Latest Roadmap Interpretation: How to Build an Internet Capital Market?
Solana announced a new roadmap last week.
Essentially, because the improvements of each chain have entered the deep water area, there is indeed a situation of piling up nouns. We will try to interpret Solana's new roadmap in a way that everyone can understand + our own analysis.
First of all, Solana has undergone a major narrative change in 2024. Solana's goal has become to build an "internet capital market", while before, Solana's goal was to build a high-performance blockchain.
Internet capital market, as the name suggests, aims to create a borderless, 24/7 financial market where various assets - such as stocks, bonds, currencies, and real-world assets (RWAs) - are tokenized and traded seamlessly on the chain.
Essentially, because the improvements of each chain have entered the deep water area, there is indeed a situation of piling up nouns. We will try to interpret Solana's new roadmap in a way that everyone can understand + our own analysis.
First of all, Solana has undergone a major narrative change in 2024. Solana's goal has become to build an "internet capital market", while before, Solana's goal was to build a high-performance blockchain.
Internet capital market, as the name suggests, aims to create a borderless, 24/7 financial market where various assets - such as stocks, bonds, currencies, and real-world assets (RWAs) - are tokenized and traded seamlessly on the chain.
See original
Cryptocurrency ETFs are becoming more and more common
For example, this one promoted by Bitwise is an index composed of a basket of 10 cryptocurrencies. (Although several CEXs have tried to launch them unsuccessfully over the past few years)
The current status is that the SEC first approved it, and later instructed to postpone, so it has not been able to be listed for a long time.
In addition, from this 10 index, you can see many clues.
First is America first
So you can see XRP, SOL, SUI, LINK, Avax, and even DOT
PS: Moreover, compared to SUI, Aptos, the leader of Facebook's trio, seems to be lagging behind.
Secondly, exchange tokens are excluded.
It's a pity for BNB, as it is actually an important part of the cryptocurrency market.
Finally, among PoW tokens, there is a preference for LTC, but not for BCH and Doge, indicating that PoW does not have an extra advantage.
Grayscale's GDLC index is even more conservative, with only 5 assets:
But it still conforms to this general rule:
(1) America first
(2) No platform tokens accepted
(3) PoW does not have a special advantage
Of course, the situation with Grayscale GDLC is similar; it was first noted by the SEC and then paused.
According to analyses from relevant insiders, it seems that a certain commissioner within the SEC opposed the proposal, leading to the suspension, with the reason for opposition being that a standard needs to be established before these index ETFs can be launched.
For example, this one promoted by Bitwise is an index composed of a basket of 10 cryptocurrencies. (Although several CEXs have tried to launch them unsuccessfully over the past few years)
The current status is that the SEC first approved it, and later instructed to postpone, so it has not been able to be listed for a long time.
In addition, from this 10 index, you can see many clues.
First is America first
So you can see XRP, SOL, SUI, LINK, Avax, and even DOT
PS: Moreover, compared to SUI, Aptos, the leader of Facebook's trio, seems to be lagging behind.
Secondly, exchange tokens are excluded.
It's a pity for BNB, as it is actually an important part of the cryptocurrency market.
Finally, among PoW tokens, there is a preference for LTC, but not for BCH and Doge, indicating that PoW does not have an extra advantage.
Grayscale's GDLC index is even more conservative, with only 5 assets:
But it still conforms to this general rule:
(1) America first
(2) No platform tokens accepted
(3) PoW does not have a special advantage
Of course, the situation with Grayscale GDLC is similar; it was first noted by the SEC and then paused.
According to analyses from relevant insiders, it seems that a certain commissioner within the SEC opposed the proposal, leading to the suspension, with the reason for opposition being that a standard needs to be established before these index ETFs can be launched.
See original
Ethereum plans to launch L1 zkEVM within a year, starting the ZK era for the main chain.
Last week, the Ethereum Foundation officially announced that Ethereum L1's own zkEVM will be launched within a year.
If you ask what the most important thing for Ethereum in the next five years is, our answer is clearārefocusing on L1, making L1 faster, in other words, L2 is already fast enough.
The ZK implementation of Ethereum is one of the most important paths (not discussing increasing gas limits here).
According to Drake's previous viewpoint, once ETH L1 is fully ZK-enabled, TPS is hopeful to increase to 1000.
This is easy to understand; it is determined by the transaction method.
ćCurrent ETH Transaction Modelć
If you ask what the most important thing for Ethereum in the next five years is, our answer is clearārefocusing on L1, making L1 faster, in other words, L2 is already fast enough.
The ZK implementation of Ethereum is one of the most important paths (not discussing increasing gas limits here).
According to Drake's previous viewpoint, once ETH L1 is fully ZK-enabled, TPS is hopeful to increase to 1000.
This is easy to understand; it is determined by the transaction method.
ćCurrent ETH Transaction Modelć
See original
Some Thoughts on InfoFi
Observations and personal views from BonnaZhu, Nothing Research Partner; the following content does not constitute any investment advice.
TLDR:
The position of prediction markets in InfoFi is underestimated
Kaito & Pump belong to the information dissemination chain
Prediction markets belong to the information pricing chain
Together becoming the 'routers' and 'anchor points' of the information age
The information explosion has elevated the status of prediction markets
InfoFi is more than just Kaito
Pump actually counts too
But prediction markets are rarely mentioned
KaitoAI has accelerated the dissemination of the information finance (InfoFi) concept, but it is still doing information distribution (Attention Distribution), simply using incentives and mental optimization to enhance traffic distribution paths and KPIs.
TLDR:
The position of prediction markets in InfoFi is underestimated
Kaito & Pump belong to the information dissemination chain
Prediction markets belong to the information pricing chain
Together becoming the 'routers' and 'anchor points' of the information age
The information explosion has elevated the status of prediction markets
InfoFi is more than just Kaito
Pump actually counts too
But prediction markets are rarely mentioned
KaitoAI has accelerated the dissemination of the information finance (InfoFi) concept, but it is still doing information distribution (Attention Distribution), simply using incentives and mental optimization to enhance traffic distribution paths and KPIs.
See original
The underlying logic behind Maple Finance's multiple growth in TVL and cryptocurrency prices within two months.
This is an observation and personal opinion from BonnaZhu of Nothing Research Partner. The following content does not constitute any investment advice.
Lending money to institutions for trading is indeed a straightforward direction for RWA.
In the past two months, both TVL and cryptocurrency prices have increased multiple times.
Although it is essentially still based on controlling and pumping logic.
The mechanism does provide a reason for funds to buy up:
1) Time deposits + deferred incentives create an invisible flywheel.
On Maple, you can deposit stablecoins and choose between demand deposits or fixed-term deposits. However, the token incentives for fixed terms are higher, and they are not distributed in real-time but are deferred until the end of each period. This creates a mechanism:
Lending money to institutions for trading is indeed a straightforward direction for RWA.
In the past two months, both TVL and cryptocurrency prices have increased multiple times.
Although it is essentially still based on controlling and pumping logic.
The mechanism does provide a reason for funds to buy up:
1) Time deposits + deferred incentives create an invisible flywheel.
On Maple, you can deposit stablecoins and choose between demand deposits or fixed-term deposits. However, the token incentives for fixed terms are higher, and they are not distributed in real-time but are deferred until the end of each period. This creates a mechanism:
See original
Observations and personal views from Nothing Research Partner BonnaZhu, the following content does not constitute any investment advice.
As a meaningful attempt, it is good, and the Conflux team has put in a lot of effort for this, but based on the current yield/risk/liquidity combination of this RWA product, it is quite difficult to scale on-chain:
- Fixed 8% annualized
- 3 months without liquidity
This has already discouraged most funds, and purchasing this product requires cross-chain transactions, which further reduces the incentive. There are many opportunities in the market that offer higher yields with instant liquidity, and if one simply aims to break even on 8%, buying Ethena Labs' sUSDe would be sufficient.
After all, these are not assets like U.S. Treasuries and U.S. stocks that inherently have excellent off-chain liquidity and strong consensus; to achieve good 'sales', the yield expectations must be sufficient, exceeding the on-chain native yield opportunities during the same period. Huma Finance and GAIB are two relatively good examples, as if you look at their PT yields on RateX and Pendle, they are basically 13-15%.
If the yields cannot be made very high, then at least the liquidity of the assets must be relatively good. However, for an underlying asset that fundamentally has little liquidity off-chain, this seems a bit too harsh; who would come up with this money?
But the reality is, if a certain underlying asset is very difficult to design a RWA structure that meets on-chain capital's preferences for yield/risk/liquidity, then that asset may not be suitable for on-chain at this stage; at least, it certainly will not be particularly welcomed.
Issuing RWA is somewhat like doing investment banking; although the compliance of product architecture is crucial, merely focusing on approval and implementation while neglecting the 'sales' aspect will ultimately lead to inefficiency.
In fact, investment banks are quite profitable
It relies on their meticulous consideration in product design
If a product does not make money and cannot be sold
Then it certainly will not be made.
As a meaningful attempt, it is good, and the Conflux team has put in a lot of effort for this, but based on the current yield/risk/liquidity combination of this RWA product, it is quite difficult to scale on-chain:
- Fixed 8% annualized
- 3 months without liquidity
This has already discouraged most funds, and purchasing this product requires cross-chain transactions, which further reduces the incentive. There are many opportunities in the market that offer higher yields with instant liquidity, and if one simply aims to break even on 8%, buying Ethena Labs' sUSDe would be sufficient.
After all, these are not assets like U.S. Treasuries and U.S. stocks that inherently have excellent off-chain liquidity and strong consensus; to achieve good 'sales', the yield expectations must be sufficient, exceeding the on-chain native yield opportunities during the same period. Huma Finance and GAIB are two relatively good examples, as if you look at their PT yields on RateX and Pendle, they are basically 13-15%.
If the yields cannot be made very high, then at least the liquidity of the assets must be relatively good. However, for an underlying asset that fundamentally has little liquidity off-chain, this seems a bit too harsh; who would come up with this money?
But the reality is, if a certain underlying asset is very difficult to design a RWA structure that meets on-chain capital's preferences for yield/risk/liquidity, then that asset may not be suitable for on-chain at this stage; at least, it certainly will not be particularly welcomed.
Issuing RWA is somewhat like doing investment banking; although the compliance of product architecture is crucial, merely focusing on approval and implementation while neglecting the 'sales' aspect will ultimately lead to inefficiency.
In fact, investment banks are quite profitable
It relies on their meticulous consideration in product design
If a product does not make money and cannot be sold
Then it certainly will not be made.
See original
Recent Hot Terms Analysis: From Ethereum Upgrade to AI Agent
[Ethereum Section]
Increase validator balance limit
Translation: Previously, 32 ETH = 1 validator (validators are like mining machines), now raised to 2048 ETH. It used to require queuing to deposit or withdraw ETH from validators.
Benefits: This raises the upper limit and significantly speeds up the queue. Moreover, with larger nodes, there is a future opportunity to promote consensus algorithms, such as only allowing large nodes to participate in block production, making it faster.
Dynamically adjust Blob capacity
Translation: L2 needs to store data on the ETH mainnet for security (similar to reporting to leadership). To avoid occupying space on the ETH mainnet, a separate space has been allocated for them, called Blob.
Increase validator balance limit
Translation: Previously, 32 ETH = 1 validator (validators are like mining machines), now raised to 2048 ETH. It used to require queuing to deposit or withdraw ETH from validators.
Benefits: This raises the upper limit and significantly speeds up the queue. Moreover, with larger nodes, there is a future opportunity to promote consensus algorithms, such as only allowing large nodes to participate in block production, making it faster.
Dynamically adjust Blob capacity
Translation: L2 needs to store data on the ETH mainnet for security (similar to reporting to leadership). To avoid occupying space on the ETH mainnet, a separate space has been allocated for them, called Blob.
See original
Analysis of the Background and Controversy Surrounding the Bitcoin Core Transaction Relay Proposal
Observations and personal opinions from Nothing Research Partner 0x_Todd; the following content does not constitute any investment advice.
The Core group released the latest statement, and the Bitcoin core development circle was in an uproar. I saw that there wasn't much discussion in the Chinese-speaking community, so I came to analyze the background of the story and share my strong opinions.
First, yesterday Bitcoin Core released a statement called (Bitcoin Core Development and Transaction Relay Policy), which was vehemently criticized by opponents as notorious as the (New York Agreement).
So what exactly did this statement say?
Bitcoin Core wants to push a built-in transaction relay.
The Core group released the latest statement, and the Bitcoin core development circle was in an uproar. I saw that there wasn't much discussion in the Chinese-speaking community, so I came to analyze the background of the story and share my strong opinions.
First, yesterday Bitcoin Core released a statement called (Bitcoin Core Development and Transaction Relay Policy), which was vehemently criticized by opponents as notorious as the (New York Agreement).
So what exactly did this statement say?
Bitcoin Core wants to push a built-in transaction relay.
See original
Project Analysis of Sahara AI
Observations and personal views from 0x_Todd of Nothing Research Partner; the following content does not constitute any investment advice.
The reason I paid attention to this project is because its investment institutions include Binance Labs, Polychain, and Pantera, among others.
The most straightforward understanding is that Sahara is an all-in-one AI tool, which includes a blockchain (Sahara Chain).
So what does this all-in-one AI include:
A data labeling platform that allows users to collect, refine, and label datasets and receive incentives.
What is data labeling?
The data labeling process is used to identify raw data (images, text files, videos, etc.) and add some information tags as context, for example, you are a human and you look at a picture of a bird, and you write down to tell the AI that this is a lark.
The reason I paid attention to this project is because its investment institutions include Binance Labs, Polychain, and Pantera, among others.
The most straightforward understanding is that Sahara is an all-in-one AI tool, which includes a blockchain (Sahara Chain).
So what does this all-in-one AI include:
A data labeling platform that allows users to collect, refine, and label datasets and receive incentives.
What is data labeling?
The data labeling process is used to identify raw data (images, text files, videos, etc.) and add some information tags as context, for example, you are a human and you look at a picture of a bird, and you write down to tell the AI that this is a lark.
See original
Observations and personal opinions from Nothing Research Partner 0x_Todd. The following content does not constitute any investment advice.
Today, while researching L2, I found that L2BEAT's standards are quite strict.
Among the top 10 L2s, there are not many that have reached Stage 1, and even those like Base, OP, and Unichain have been tagged; if they do not rectify within 53 days, they will drop back to Stage 0. Of course, they all use OP Stack, so being tagged together is normal.
Among the top 5, only Arbitrum remains strong, considered the backbone of Stage 1 in L2...
Vitalik originally proposed a three-step "auxiliary wheel" roadmap (Stage 0 ā Stage 1 ā Stage 2), but L2BEAT has transformed Vitalik's ideas into a concrete and measurable checklist (proof of usability, exit window, time lock, security committee design, etc.).
Specifically, what Stage an L2 is in ultimately depends on a core question: who can veto or change the state?
In Stage 0, the core team (or low-threshold multi-signature) can override the proof system.
In Stage 1, only a supermajority security committee (ā„ 75% signatures) can overturn it; all others (including the core team) must go through the proof system.
In Stage 2, the proof system itself is the final arbiter; the security committee can only intervene to fix provable on-chain vulnerabilities.
Especially in Stage 1, L2BEAT has quantified the requirements:
ā„8 members in the security committee, with at least half being external members
ā„7 days of upgrade time lock ("exit window")
ā„5 external validators
So I specifically looked into the current situation of Arbitrum's security committee. Besides the foundation members, there are also L2BEAT co-founder Bartek Kiepuszewski, and representatives from security or governance organizations like OpenZeppelin, Immunefi, Gauntlet, etc., totaling 12 members.
Normal upgrades are conducted via a 9/12 multi-signature. Then, the Arb committee divides the members into 6+6, with half being re-elected each year.
After Arb Bold (Bounded Liquidity Delay) officially launched in February this year, the contract now supports anyone staking to participate, submit/challenge assertions, which essentially completes the last task of Stage 1.
This is what makes Arbitrum one of the few true Stage 1 L2s.
Today, while researching L2, I found that L2BEAT's standards are quite strict.
Among the top 10 L2s, there are not many that have reached Stage 1, and even those like Base, OP, and Unichain have been tagged; if they do not rectify within 53 days, they will drop back to Stage 0. Of course, they all use OP Stack, so being tagged together is normal.
Among the top 5, only Arbitrum remains strong, considered the backbone of Stage 1 in L2...
Vitalik originally proposed a three-step "auxiliary wheel" roadmap (Stage 0 ā Stage 1 ā Stage 2), but L2BEAT has transformed Vitalik's ideas into a concrete and measurable checklist (proof of usability, exit window, time lock, security committee design, etc.).
Specifically, what Stage an L2 is in ultimately depends on a core question: who can veto or change the state?
In Stage 0, the core team (or low-threshold multi-signature) can override the proof system.
In Stage 1, only a supermajority security committee (ā„ 75% signatures) can overturn it; all others (including the core team) must go through the proof system.
In Stage 2, the proof system itself is the final arbiter; the security committee can only intervene to fix provable on-chain vulnerabilities.
Especially in Stage 1, L2BEAT has quantified the requirements:
ā„8 members in the security committee, with at least half being external members
ā„7 days of upgrade time lock ("exit window")
ā„5 external validators
So I specifically looked into the current situation of Arbitrum's security committee. Besides the foundation members, there are also L2BEAT co-founder Bartek Kiepuszewski, and representatives from security or governance organizations like OpenZeppelin, Immunefi, Gauntlet, etc., totaling 12 members.
Normal upgrades are conducted via a 9/12 multi-signature. Then, the Arb committee divides the members into 6+6, with half being re-elected each year.
After Arb Bold (Bounded Liquidity Delay) officially launched in February this year, the contract now supports anyone staking to participate, submit/challenge assertions, which essentially completes the last task of Stage 1.
This is what makes Arbitrum one of the few true Stage 1 L2s.
See original
Circle's IPO: The real Beta may actually be Coinbase
Insights and personal views from BonnaZhu of Nothing Research Partner; the following content does not constitute any investment advice.
The latest news is that Circle has raised its valuation to $7.2 billion, selling 32 million shares, priced at $27-28 each. With an annual income of $1.676 billion and a net profit of $155 million, this corresponds to a static P/E of 46 times. Considering that Circle's stablecoin expansion in Q1 2025 is particularly rapid and growth expectations are good, this pricing does not seem outrageous and continues to attract various funds.
However, if you read the prospectus carefully and see that Circle has to pay Coinbase 907.9 million yuan annually, accounting for more than 50% of Circle's revenue, you will most likely frown and lament its difficult position in the middle.
The latest news is that Circle has raised its valuation to $7.2 billion, selling 32 million shares, priced at $27-28 each. With an annual income of $1.676 billion and a net profit of $155 million, this corresponds to a static P/E of 46 times. Considering that Circle's stablecoin expansion in Q1 2025 is particularly rapid and growth expectations are good, this pricing does not seem outrageous and continues to attract various funds.
However, if you read the prospectus carefully and see that Circle has to pay Coinbase 907.9 million yuan annually, accounting for more than 50% of Circle's revenue, you will most likely frown and lament its difficult position in the middle.
See original
What is the core competitiveness of Launchpads?
Observation and personal views from BonnaZhu of Nothing Research Partner, the following content does not constitute any investment advice.
I heard that pump.fun is really going to launch a token this time, and with $PUMP as a benchmark, the launch platform will undergo a revaluation. However, as mentioned in this article, the launch platforms have diverged into two paths:
One type is the permissionless Fair Launch represented by Pumpfun, and the other is the Coordinated Launch empowered project through organized issuance. Rather than saying they are in competition, it is more accurate to say their tracks have completely diverged.
1) Fair Launch: First comes the price, then the story
I heard that pump.fun is really going to launch a token this time, and with $PUMP as a benchmark, the launch platform will undergo a revaluation. However, as mentioned in this article, the launch platforms have diverged into two paths:
One type is the permissionless Fair Launch represented by Pumpfun, and the other is the Coordinated Launch empowered project through organized issuance. Rather than saying they are in competition, it is more accurate to say their tracks have completely diverged.
1) Fair Launch: First comes the price, then the story
See original
A Detailed Discussion on ETH Raising the GAS Limit to 60 Million
This is an observation and personal opinion from Nothing Research Partner 0x_Todd. The following content does not constitute any investment advice.
Many people still have the impression that ETH's TPS (transactions per second) is 15, but in fact, ETH's peak TPS has now increased by 4x to 60 transactions per second.
Although it is related to years of continuous optimization, the most direct reason can be attributed to the simple and straightforward increase of the GAS Limit from the previous cap of 15 million to 36 million.
Recently, ETH is about to raise the GAS Limit to a cap of 60 million again.
Many people still have the impression that ETH's TPS (transactions per second) is 15, but in fact, ETH's peak TPS has now increased by 4x to 60 transactions per second.
Although it is related to years of continuous optimization, the most direct reason can be attributed to the simple and straightforward increase of the GAS Limit from the previous cap of 15 million to 36 million.
Recently, ETH is about to raise the GAS Limit to a cap of 60 million again.
See original
Follow-up on the SUI Theft Incident ā What kind of code did SUI update to retrieve assets?
The core idea of this hard fork can be summarized in one sentence: completely ban the 'hacker address', and temporarily declare a 'substitute signer' in the protocol, allowing only 1-2 specific 'redemption transactions' to pass verification and transfer the money.
1. How is the substitute transaction implemented?
Specifically, it can be broken down into two steps:
The first step is to add a new parameter.
SUI has added a parameter called aliased_addresses to the signature verification layer verify_sender_signed_data_message_signatures, which does a replacement.
Simply put, aliased means substitute address.
The second step is to open a loophole in the deny check.
1. How is the substitute transaction implemented?
Specifically, it can be broken down into two steps:
The first step is to add a new parameter.
SUI has added a parameter called aliased_addresses to the signature verification layer verify_sender_signed_data_message_signatures, which does a replacement.
Simply put, aliased means substitute address.
The second step is to open a loophole in the deny check.
See original
On the Chaos of RWA
Observations and personal opinions from BonnaZhu of Nothing Research Partner; the following content does not constitute any investment advice.
Chaos is inevitable.
However, using a heavy-handed approach to eliminate RWA is clearly overkill. Just because one track and narrative hasn't succeeded in the past doesn't mean it will never succeed. The key is who steps in to do it and the timing.
Times have changed; the GENIUS Act, the SEC's tokenization framework expectations, and the deregulation in the U.S. clearly indicate that the coming years will be an era of great integration between off-chain and on-chain, TradFi and DeFi.
Chaos is inevitable.
However, using a heavy-handed approach to eliminate RWA is clearly overkill. Just because one track and narrative hasn't succeeded in the past doesn't mean it will never succeed. The key is who steps in to do it and the timing.
Times have changed; the GENIUS Act, the SEC's tokenization framework expectations, and the deregulation in the U.S. clearly indicate that the coming years will be an era of great integration between off-chain and on-chain, TradFi and DeFi.
See original
The cross-chain trading platform Fly Trade on Sonic is about to launch TGE
A few days ago, the token was still included in the listing roadmap of Kraken Exchange. However, under the trend of chain abstraction, narratives such as liquidity aggregation and trading routing are gradually becoming outdated, and it is also difficult to escape the valuation suppression of pioneers like 1inch. But aside from the narrative, the team's improvements in the ve(3,3) model do show some cleverness in its incentive model:
1) Traditional ve(3,3), whether it's Velodrome, Aerodrome, or Shadow Exchange, essentially revolves around LP incentives. The vetoken holders vote to decide which pools' LPs receive token emissions, and LPs earn these rewards by providing liquidity, while also giving up their share of transaction fees that should belong to them to the vetoken voters.
1) Traditional ve(3,3), whether it's Velodrome, Aerodrome, or Shadow Exchange, essentially revolves around LP incentives. The vetoken holders vote to decide which pools' LPs receive token emissions, and LPs earn these rewards by providing liquidity, while also giving up their share of transaction fees that should belong to them to the vetoken voters.
See original
The attention economy is not limited to memes; it can also be IPOs.
Observations and personal views from Nothing Research Partner 0x_Todd. The following content does not constitute any investment advice.
Earning points through Yap and then redeeming those points for new project quotas instantly brings people back to the ICO boom of 2017 and 2018āwriting articles and producing videos for projects, then using the results to negotiate whitelist spots with project teams.
1. An alternative mining approach of 'Contribution = Reward'
Unlike potentially facing closed doors in the past, Virtuals Protocol standardizes the 'Contribution = Reward' mechanism through Kaito AI, ensuring that the efforts of community users are recognized:
Earning points through Yap and then redeeming those points for new project quotas instantly brings people back to the ICO boom of 2017 and 2018āwriting articles and producing videos for projects, then using the results to negotiate whitelist spots with project teams.
1. An alternative mining approach of 'Contribution = Reward'
Unlike potentially facing closed doors in the past, Virtuals Protocol standardizes the 'Contribution = Reward' mechanism through Kaito AI, ensuring that the efforts of community users are recognized:
See original
Regarding SUI's Freezing Operation
Regarding the operation of freezing hacker addresses by SUI, we have briefly sorted out its blacklist and whitelist mechanism.
1. How is freezing implemented?
First of all, the SUI chain has always had a feature called Deny List (blacklist for denial of service). Any address that enters the blacklist will not be able to execute related transactions on the nodes.
It is precisely because this feature has long existed in the client that this emergency freeze of hacker addresses was possible. Otherwise, although SUI has only 113 nodes, even if Cetus called each one, it would still be too late.
SUI has not suddenly become a centralized chain since yesterday; it has always been one, at least since the blacklist feature was added.
1. How is freezing implemented?
First of all, the SUI chain has always had a feature called Deny List (blacklist for denial of service). Any address that enters the blacklist will not be able to execute related transactions on the nodes.
It is precisely because this feature has long existed in the client that this emergency freeze of hacker addresses was possible. Otherwise, although SUI has only 113 nodes, even if Cetus called each one, it would still be too late.
SUI has not suddenly become a centralized chain since yesterday; it has always been one, at least since the blacklist feature was added.
See original
Bitcoin has three major holidays:
Creation Day October 31st
On October 31, 2008, Satoshi Nakamoto published the white paper "Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System."
Holiday Custom: Re-read the white paper š
Genesis Day January 3rd
On January 3, 2009, the first block of the Bitcoin blockchain was mined, officially launching the Bitcoin network.
Holiday Custom: Mock that former British Prime Minister š¤¦
Pizza Day May 22nd
A user on the BBT forum, Laszlo, used 10,000 bitcoins to buy two pizzas, marking the first documented use of Bitcoin as a real-world payment medium.
Holiday Custom: Eat two slices of pizza! š
Creation Day October 31st
On October 31, 2008, Satoshi Nakamoto published the white paper "Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System."
Holiday Custom: Re-read the white paper š
Genesis Day January 3rd
On January 3, 2009, the first block of the Bitcoin blockchain was mined, officially launching the Bitcoin network.
Holiday Custom: Mock that former British Prime Minister š¤¦
Pizza Day May 22nd
A user on the BBT forum, Laszlo, used 10,000 bitcoins to buy two pizzas, marking the first documented use of Bitcoin as a real-world payment medium.
Holiday Custom: Eat two slices of pizza! š
Login to explore more contents