Orbit Post Sitemap

It's often said that stablecoin remittances are cheap, but no one talks about the truly expensive part. The idea that stablecoin cross-border transfers are cheaper might actually be misunderstood. Jonah Burian, an investor at Blockchain Capital, wrote a rather blunt article dissecting this narrative. His point is simple: if the receiving end already wants stablecoins, then on-chain transfers are indeed almost zero cost, available 24/7, and settle in seconds—no complaints there. But the real headache is when both ends require fiat currency, for example, sending USD from one side and receiving Mexican Pesos on the other. Let's first look at the oldest route. Suppose Alice in the U.S. wants to send money to Bob in Mexico, and neither bank has branches in the other's country. The money must go through a larger correspondent bank, which then connects to the local Mexican bank. The money is deducted from Alice's account, the correspondent bank converts it to Pesos at their exchange rate, taking a margin on the spread, and the local bank may charge another fee upon receipt. All parties communicate via SWIFT, which itself costs money to send messages. According to World Bank data, the average cost for consumer remittances through banks—including fees and exchange rate spreads—is close to 15%, and it usually takes 1 to 5 business days. Next is a segment many people subconsciously overlook. In 2011, two friends in London faced opposite problems: one earned Euros but lived in the UK spending Pounds, the other earned Pounds but had to repay a Euro mortgage in Estonia. They bypassed banks entirely by paying each other locally, so no money actually crossed borders. This grassroots method later evolved into Wise. The model pairs opposite currency needs so that what looks like a cross-border transfer is actually money moving from one local pocket to another. Wise's all-in cross-border fee has been squeezed to about 0.5%, with the latest quarter still at 0.50%, while the World Bank's average for pure remittance providers is 3.5%. Understanding these two routes clarifies stablecoin's role. The popular method now is the "stablecoin sandwich": convert fiat to stablecoin, transfer on-chain, then convert back to local fiat. The on-chain transfer cost in the middle is less than a cent, and with competition among fiat-to-stablecoin gateways, that step's cost is approaching zero. The problem lies in the last step: Bob wants Pesos, not USDC, so he must find a local off-ramp to convert, and in some markets, the USD-to-local currency spread remains painfully wide. So the truth is this: blockchain slashes the middle transfer cost to rock bottom, but the currency exchange costs at both ends remain unchanged. The savings you think you get are likely just shifted from one step to another. What exactly has stablecoin changed then? The author’s answer is more interesting than just saving money. Building a global payment network like Wise is extremely difficult and only a few companies can do it. Stablecoins break down this barrier: if you want to start a cross-border payment company, you no longer need to build a global banking network from scratch. You just need a good on-ramp on one side and a good off-ramp on the other, connected by blockchain. The capabilities once bundled in closed networks are now modularized and thrown into an open market, where local off-ramps compete fiercely on every conversion. Yellow Card, focusing on several African countries, is an example of this approach. Fragmentation sounds like a disadvantage, but it actually puts players into the game. The author also acknowledges the opposing view: as more platforms emerge, the largest ones are starting vertical integration again, and the market could reconsolidate in the future. But he agrees with one point: open rails remain open, and if one off-ramp tries to take too much margin, another nearby can always offer a better price. Bringing this back to our holdings: this kind of research cools down the payment narrative. Payment tokens that spike on any news are prone to one-day rallies, with asymmetric costs and risks for chasing highs. In the medium to long term, the real winners are likely those holding on-ramp and off-ramp licenses and local channels, not the loudest voices. Watching this sector, focus should be on channels and fees, not announcements. The last time you sent money abroad, what really ate your cost—was it the fees, or the exchange spread you never even saw?Live trading at @玩的就是实盘九总 Let's talk about US stocks On Friday, the three major indexes all closed higher. The Dow rose 0.98% to 53,277 points, the S&P 500 increased 0.43% to 7,674 points, and the Nasdaq gained 0.44% to 26,180 points. However, looking at the whole week, all three indexes closed lower on the weekly chart. The US August services PMI rose to 56.8, marking the strongest expansion since December 2024. But the 10-year US Treasury yield remains high at 4.736%, and the 30-year yield surged to 5.275%. The Treasury's repurchase move only held for one day, and long-term bond yields have returned. But the AI hardware sector shows a completely different picture. Storage stocks rebounded across the board—SK Hynix up 4.43%, Micron up 3.97%, SanDisk up 2.02%. Optical communications also strengthened simultaneously, with Lumentum up 6.24%, and Marvell Technology up 5.79%. Capital is still selectively buying, not fully withdrawing. The core contradiction remains—the US Treasury yields won't come down, so high-valuation tech stocks are struggling to breathe. Storage and optical communications rise, the seven giants fall, each moving independently within the same market. My position here is not heavy; I'll first see when the US Treasury yields can stabilize. Personal opinion, not investment advice This obscure path discovered by Vitalik might replace the lock on your wallet Last night, Vitalik posted another long article with a rather discouraging title: "Obfuscation Part 3: Local Mixing." In Chinese, it translates to "local mixing." He said something quite significant in it: this could become a new foundational cryptographic tool following elliptic curves, RSA, and lattice cryptography. First, let me explain why this statement is important. The private key in your wallet currently relies on elliptic curve mathematics. It is the foundation of everyone's assets. There are only a few foundational tools like this, and Vitalik suggests there might be one more. This is no small matter. So what exactly does obfuscation do? Simply put, it scrambles a program into a form that no one can understand, but its functionality remains unchanged. It's like giving someone a recipe to cook a dish; the dish they make tastes exactly the same as yours, but they can't tell what ingredients were used by looking at the recipe. This ability sounds mystical but has enormous practical uses: on-chain private computation, key custody, anti-plagiarism contracts, and more. In cryptography circles, it's called the final frontier because theoretically, all other tools can be constructed by combining obfuscation with a one-way function. The problem is that it has always been prohibitively expensive. Current mainstream obfuscation schemes rely on complex mathematical assumptions, and the computational cost is so high that no one dares to use them in real products. They work in academic papers but are impractical in reality. Local mixing takes a completely different approach. It doesn't rely on elliptic curves, large integer factorization, or lattice cryptography. Instead, it borrows from symmetric cryptography and hash functions—basically repeatedly scrambling, shredding, and reassembling data. The specific steps have intimidating names: invertibility, hardening, mixing, splitting, cross-moving, and something called componentization. Simply put, it inserts random structures into circuits, rearranges logic gates, and adds a layer of nonlinear masking so that anyone peeking in cannot reconstruct the original computation logic. The functionality remains the same, but leakage is zero. Vitalik himself hasn't overhyped it. He clearly states this path is still very early, its security hasn't been verified over the long term, and traditional attacks like random and linear analysis still pose threats. This field will require years of cryptanalysis and optimization to mature. However, he added an interesting note that AI-assisted research might significantly accelerate this process. What if it really works? The most direct outcome would be a new quantum-resistant public-key encryption scheme. That means even if quantum computers are truly built someday, they still won't be able to break the lock on your wallet. We panic about this every few months when some big company announces a chip, and people in groups immediately shout that private keys are doomed and coins will be worthless. This time is different because someone is actually building a new lock with real effort, not just arguing on Twitter. Looking at it from a position perspective: in the short term, don't expect this news to bring any immediate gains to ETH. It often takes years for public chain research to move from papers to mainnet, so expecting it to be a catalyst is wishful thinking. Chasing such news is a bad bet. But in the mid to long term, the significance is completely different. Ethereum's valuation always includes a premium for those still working on foundational technology. A chain where people are pondering cryptography ten years from now is naturally worth more than one where people only focus on next week's slogans. One more personal opinion: in the past two years, the market has focused all attention on who is rising fastest. The things that truly affect whether our wallets can be safely stored for ten years are often so quiet that no one shares them. If you remember only one sentence today, remember this: the lock behind your private key is not eternal; someone is already replacing it in advance. So one question: when quantum computers really arrive, where do you plan to store your coins? After the flash crash, the sideways movement without a rebound shows a clear lack of bullish confidence. On Friday's closing, $BTC plunged sharply from $79,500 to $76,200, dropping over 4% within 20 minutes, causing severe liquidations of long positions across the network. The key point is that after the drop, it failed to recover and has been hovering around $77,000, with buying interest absent — this is not a shakeout, but a break in support. The previous rapid rise from $59,500 to $79,500 was mainly driven by short covering and passive ETF inflows, not by strong buying from major players. Once the liquidation wave ended and ETF inflows slowed, the market lost its upward momentum; after the spike, no one stepped in to buy, indicating that the buy orders below have been cleared out. With market makers absent over the weekend, liquidity is at its worst, so expecting a V-shaped recovery is unrealistic; a weak consolidation and slow rotation are more likely. The daily RSI remains above 70, indicating overbought conditions have not been fully released. Strategically, don't rush to catch the falling knife. Wait for a stable pullback in the $74,500-$75,000 range or a volume-backed recovery above $78,000 before considering action. If the hourly candle fails to close above $77,000, the next target is $72,000. Trump's harshest sanctions just came out, Iran already says they're useless In the early hours of August 22, the foreign ministers of Oman and Iran sat at the same table to discuss the same issue: how to use negotiations to ensure the safe passage of ships through the Strait of Hormuz again. Just a few hours before this news broke, Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi dropped a harsh remark on social media. He wasn’t talking about negotiation but rather a retort. In response to Trump's recent announcement of the so-called "most devastating economic action ever taken against a country," Araghchi’s exact words were: We've seen this act before, the same lies, just a different set of bullies, destined to fail. He also went through the rounds of pressure the U.S. has applied over the past fourteen years, eight years, and five months, concluding none succeeded. The White House wants to strike hard, Tehran publicly says your move is useless, with Oman quietly mediating in between. This scene looks like two people shouting insults from a distance while each sends intermediaries to negotiate terms. What’s really worth our attention is the unspoken keyword behind this war of words: Hormuz. The narrowest part of this strait is less than forty kilometers wide, yet it handles about one-fifth of the world’s oil maritime transport. Usually, people think it’s far from their positions, but if a few fewer ships pass through, the risk premium on crude oil immediately spikes. When oil prices jitter, inflation expectations follow suit, and the Federal Reserve’s rate cut plans have to be recalculated. For Bitcoin, a risk asset most sensitive to liquidity, every negotiation in the Middle East can ultimately show up as a daily candlestick in our own accounts. That’s why every time something happens in the Middle East, veteran traders’ first reaction isn’t to check charts but to refresh news feeds. Geopolitical risk never plays by technical analysis rules. Don’t forget the market has memory. In past years, whenever Iran and the West clashed near Hormuz, crude oil would jump first, risk assets would suffer, and only after negotiation news landed would things slowly recover. This time is different: Bitcoin just surged from over 70,000 to nearly 80,000, sentiment is hot, and any external black swan could be the stone that suppresses this momentum. So don’t just scroll past this as a simple headline. While we watch on-chain data and ETF net inflows, we should also keep an eye on those negotiation tables no one is really watching. One side announces it will strike hard, the other says you can’t hold us down, yet ships still pass through that narrow waterway. The question now is, both sides say the other has no chance, but if even fewer ships pass through the strait, do you think Bitcoin will first follow risk-off sentiment or liquidity?#美国PMI创四年新高，9月加息分歧升温 S&P Global announced on August 21 that the preliminary US composite PMI for August was 56.0, the highest since April 2022, far exceeding the expected 54. The services PMI was 56.8, the highest in nearly 20 months; the manufacturing PMI was 53.2, a five-month low. Price pressures have eased somewhat, with the services sector sales price growth rate hitting a ten-month low; the employment composite index recorded the largest increase since January 2025; backlogs grew at the fastest pace since May 2022. S&P Global expects the annualized GDP growth rate for Q3 to be close to 3%, double the 1.5% in Q2. The market reaction was very honest—after the Treasury's repurchase announcement pushed down the 30-year US Treasury yield, it quickly rebounded 6 basis points to 5.25%, the S&P 500 fell 0.87%, and the Nasdaq dropped 1%. The services sector is saying "the economy is strong," while manufacturing is saying "the supply chain is breaking." Before the September FOMC, there is still a CPI report and an employment report; the PMI is just the first piece of the puzzle. S&P Global Chief Economist Williamson put it most directly: "The US economy is booming," but this precisely makes the Fed's path more difficult—cutting rates too slowly may cause overheating and reignite inflation; cutting too quickly may fuel asset bubbles. For September, this data gives no clear direction. CME data shows a rate hike probability of about 36.2% and a hold probability of 63.8%—the market itself is wavering. The signal for a September rate hike is "complex" rather than a "clear answer." People who want to earn attention rewards first have to give up their privacy. On August 18, Kaito AI quietly launched a browser extension called Kaito Pulse. Once installed, under every tweet you see on X, it might directly display the other party's real positions and profits/losses on Polymarket and Hyperliquid. In other words, from now on, who publicly claims to be long and who secretly shorts can be seen at a glance by visiting their homepage. Social platforms and on-chain behavior are stitched together. Behind this is a new scoring system called Aura, designed to replace the original Yaps. Previously, Kaito mainly counted who was discussing the most actively, but a bunch of accounts mass-produced content to flood the leaderboard, making it increasingly unreliable. So this time, they said they want to measure whether the discussion value is trustworthy by combining social influence and on-chain behavior into the scoring. The first project after the reboot, Axis Robotics, reignited the reward model for creators and community contributors. It sounds great—the platform wants to help us distinguish real experts from bots. But the problem lies in the permissions the extension requires. After community developer Ultra examined the extension's code, they found it wants far more than just displaying positions. Device fingerprints like GPU rendering info and hardware model might be collected; your browsing path and dwell time on X are also tracked, and even third-party accounts from ChatGPT and trading platforms require verification. This is quite different from the official claim of only viewing public trading records. Kaito's later response was standard rhetoric: following the principle of minimization, not accessing full account content, not storing raw data, using zkTLS proofs for external verification instead of reading underlying data, and promising to optimize permission explanations. But a browser extension that can access your hardware fingerprint and browsing history inherently raises concerns about permission boundaries. After all, once you grant permissions to something installed in your browser, you can't take them back. The community is already divided into two camps. Supporters say identity and behavior verification is a necessary cost to suppress fake influence. Opponents ask why we have to give up privacy just for more accurate scoring. This issue hits the unresolved core of the InfoFi track: the more AI-generated content and bots there are, the more platforms have to reach out for data to identify real influence. And what about us users? How much privacy are we willing to give up for those incentive points? Will you install this extension, or would you rather earn fewer rewards than expose your browsing history and hardware fingerprint to others? Ultimately, monetizing attention is fine, but you have to do the math yourself.The whale made a profit of seventy million but missed out on the strongest rebound in this round There’s an interesting detail tonight. A whale, codenamed for setting 10 major goals, reviewed this round of operations on X, saying that there’s still about 70 million profit lying in his account, but then he admitted that he actually missed out on the strongest surge in this round. Here’s what happened. Around 72,500, he wanted to buy back the long positions he had closed earlier, so he placed limit buy orders between 70,500 and 71,500 in advance, and at the same time placed a short order near 76,000, planning to catch a pullback if the price surged directly. However, the buy orders below didn’t get filled, but the short order at 76,000 did, and then the price shot up above 79,000, completely leaving him behind. That short order at 76,000 itself lost money, but overall he still made 70 million. The key is that the profits that should have been taken earlier were already secured; what he missed was just the rebound part, not a full-position wrong bet. Many people lose because they do the opposite: they misread the direction and add positions to average down, turning a small mistake into a big hole. This guy made profits steadily, admitted mistakes, and always kept the rhythm in his own hands. He even set a hard deadline for himself: if the daily candle closes effectively above 80,500, he will admit the mistake, close all positions, and take a break. Setting a fixed line for admitting mistakes is much more useful than guessing tops and bottoms every day. Many of us do the opposite: play dead when losing, and hesitate to exit when prices rise. Looking back at his own summary, the mistake wasn’t in the mid-to-long-term direction but in underestimating the strength of this rally and trying to bet on a pullback too early. On the market side, the short squeeze starting August 19th cleared over two billion dollars in shorts, ranking among the largest single-day short liquidations in crypto history. Even whales of this level placed orders in advance waiting for a pullback, showing that the market’s expectation for a correction never stopped, but the price just didn’t turn back. For swing traders, this is a reminder. When a trend comes, don’t fight your own position. When the moving average, which is basically the average cost line, is still going up, making counter-trend trades only wins small money but loses rhythm and mindset. If you really want to wait for a pullback, wait until the structure breaks down, not just place an order based on a feeling. Finally, this guy said he still remains bullish mid-to-long term, even thinking we could see 100,000 by March next year. But at this position, he will admit mistakes and close positions if he’s wrong, or add back shorts if he can’t hold the ground. How about you? Did you take full profit this round or are you still waiting for that pullback that never came? Bitcoin dropped 20%, but RWA defied the trend to reach $33 billion There is a rather unusual figure in the first half of this year. Bitcoin as a whole fell by more than 20%, with the Federal Reserve turning hawkish combined with geopolitical conflicts, putting pressure on the entire market. Yet in this environment, RWA, or Real World Assets on-chain, grew against the trend to a scale of $33 billion, becoming one of the few sectors still expanding. Where did the money go? Part of it was absorbed by the AI infrastructure financing frenzy; tech companies have issued over $170 billion in bonds this year, competing with governments for long-term funds. Another part didn’t go far but took a turn into RWA. Simply put, institutions don’t want to directly bet on coin price volatility but are willing to move traditional assets like government bonds and bonds onto the blockchain to earn stable interest and compliance benefits. What does this mean for us? The rise of RWA doesn’t mean Bitcoin will take off tomorrow, but it indicates one thing: the blockchain is no longer just speculative capital; real institutions are voting with their feet and moving in. This capital migration often has more reference value than a single bullish candle because it represents medium- to long-term allocation intentions, not hot money chasing pumps and dumps. Why now? As the US regulatory framework gradually clarifies, tokenizing interest-bearing assets like US Treasuries and funds allows institutions to have compliant identities and benefit from on-chain efficiency. Compared to directly buying coins and enduring severe volatility, this slow money better suits large capital appetites, so even if Bitcoin is falling, RWA still attracts funds. A concrete example: after tokenizing US Treasuries, interest-bearing assets can be traded on-chain 24/7, something traditional brokers can’t offer. That’s why traditional giants like BlackRock are quietly deploying along this line. In the short term, RWA’s market still strongly correlates with Bitcoin; when Bitcoin pulls back, RWA will be dragged down too. However, RWA is not without pitfalls. Smart contracts have had incidents, and choosing the wrong protocol can still lead to total loss. No matter how fancy the name, you can’t blindly jump in. But the long-term logic is clear: when government bonds and funds can circulate on-chain, crypto gains a tether to traditional finance, potentially smoothing out bull and bear volatility over time. At this point, I treat it as an observation indicator rather than a buy-the-rally target. Which line do you favor more: waiting for coin prices to warm up, or believing that slow money like RWA is the next main theme? Is the altcoin season really coming now that Bitcoin has broken 77,000? Bitcoin surged past 77,000 this Monday, and Ether jumped 20% in a single day. People in the group chat are already shouting about altcoin season. Every time Bitcoin sets the stage, funds are supposed to flow into altcoins. We've seen this script play out several times. Has your account recovered this week, or is it still stuck at the doorstep of altcoins? But this time it's a bit different. The eight altcoins mentioned in the article—SOL, UNI, AAVE, HYPE among them—each have different logics. SOL relies on institutional treasuries and on-chain activity, AAVE benefits from a rebound in lending demand, HYPE is a platform token with built-in traffic, and UNI is an established DEX regaining presence through market maker competition. Not just any random altcoin can fly along. Another signal worth watching is that Ether's spot ETF has seen continuous net inflows, and staking volumes have hit new highs. This kind of fundamental demand is more solid than just a pump. Bitcoin sets the stage, Ether plays the lead, and altcoins can more easily follow the rhythm; pure sentiment alone can't sustain it. What we should be most cautious about is this kind of atmosphere. Bitcoin just stabilized, and everyone is afraid of missing out, so those rushing in are mostly emotional traders who missed out before. Historically, when altcoin season truly arrives, it often starts to pull back right after you can't resist chasing the highs. The ones who make money are always those who got in early. For us, the approach needs to be split. In the short term, altcoins are several times more volatile than Bitcoin; holding a heavier position can keep you up at night. If you really want to participate, use a small amount to test the waters—like keeping altcoin positions to 10-20% of your total portfolio. Losing that won't affect your mindset, and gaining won't make you envious. In the mid-term, coins with real revenue and users can endure cycles better than pure narrative-driven memes; when prices drop, there are still buyers. As for pure memes, they rise fast and crash fast. The more gimmicky the name, the more you need to control your impulse. Those are about running fast, not holding steady. A truly stable altcoin season requires seeing funds continuously moving from Bitcoin to small and mid-cap coins, not everyone getting hyped over a single green candle. Right now, it feels more like a warm-up. Don't forget, this rally is largely because shorts were forced to liquidate over $2 billion, cleaning out leverage and creating room for what's next. But if funding rates spike back to exchange limits, that's a sign of overcrowding. Don't mistake this warm-up for the main upward wave. Are you holding mostly Bitcoin and Ether now, or have you already positioned in some altcoins ahead of this seasonal wind?Bitcoin broke through 70,000, but those in the prediction markets are still betting it will fall back to 55,000 This rebound has been stronger than many expected. A few days ago, Bitcoin was still around 71,500, with a single-day increase of 3.26%. In no time, it pushed all the way close to 80,000, marking the strongest surge in five months. Yet, while the price was crazily climbing, a group of people stubbornly bet it would drop back to 55,000. I checked data from several mainstream prediction markets, and the more I looked, the more interesting it became. A few days ago on Myriad, about 70% of bets were that Bitcoin would first fall to 55,000. When the rebound actually came, the bulls and bears barely balanced out at 52% to 48%, almost like flipping a coin. Polymarket was even more absurd; the year-end contract still gave a 56% probability that Bitcoin would first touch 55,000. On Kalshi, traders gave only a 30% chance of breaking 70,000 by August, but that threshold has already been trampled underfoot. Putting these numbers together paints a clear picture. The price has genuinely surged, but the mindset of those betting still lingers in a bear market. They haven’t ignored the rise; they’re just scared by the previous drop, their muscle memory stuck at the 55,000 line. Even professional traders are hesitating, let alone ordinary retail investors. The most ironic thing is the trading volume. More and more people are using prediction markets to hedge their real positions, and these platforms are repeatedly hitting record highs in trading volume. This means that the odds reversal on Myriad wasn’t so much about who predicted correctly, but more about who was caught off guard. The people actually in the market were the last to react. The main pressure is on short-term positions; the year-end contracts have barely moved. Myriad doesn’t have a real expiration date; it settles only when spot hits 84,000 or 55,000. Shorts are being squeezed in the short term, but no one dares to follow in the long term. This split itself indicates the problem. The real-time bullish probability is only about 52%; no one has the guts to truly believe this rally will go all the way. Looking back, the key level is quite clear. The lower edge of the resistance zone at 70,284 USD: holding it opens the way to above 73,000, losing it means falling back below 68,000, the old range that trapped it for months. This range looks familiar; it appeared as a narrowing wedge before the crashes in October 2025 and January 2026. Now the price has risen above it, but the sentiment in prediction markets is at best cautiously optimistic. Do you think those betting on 55,000 really see risks that retail investors don’t, or are they simply too scared by the last drop to turn bullish?Dalio Changes Tune, Advises Ordinary People to Stock Up on Gold and Bitcoin Ray Dalio, founder of Bridgewater Associates, has recently sounded the alarm again. This isn’t the first time he’s warned of a crisis, but this time he was unusually blunt: the US debt crisis is approaching, and ordinary people need to prepare a fallback plan, which is to hold more gold and Bitcoin. Hearing this from a traditional macro veteran like Dalio feels a bit strange. He’s managed money for decades and has mostly been indifferent to crypto assets, at best politely saying Bitcoin is like a younger version of gold. Now he directly equates Bitcoin with gold as shields for ordinary people against a debt crisis, a pivot that’s worth pondering. His core concern is the ever-growing US debt. Jin10 just reported that the US national debt has surpassed $40 trillion. Trump himself responded by saying growth will solve it and denied having Treasury Secretary Mnuchin intervene in the debt market. But the market thinks otherwise; long-term bond yields remain high, and everyone is guessing who will take over the next tranche. Dalio’s logic isn’t complicated. When the government fills holes by printing money and borrowing, those holding cash suffer the most, so he categorizes both gold and Bitcoin as stores of value. Gold has already hit historic highs this round, and he’s always been a staunch supporter of gold; now by including Bitcoin, he’s essentially acknowledging that it can also serve as a safe haven in extreme situations. In other words, the more money is printed, the less he trusts paper wealth. Bitcoin has conveniently played into his script this week. Riding the wave of US debt repurchases and favorable policies, Bitcoin surged back near $80,000, rising nearly 25% in a single week. Bulls say this is exactly the kind of currency depreciation expectation Dalio fears coming into play. Interestingly, different people respond differently to US debt concerns. Some increase holdings in gold ETFs, some list Bitcoin as cash equivalents in corporate financial reports, and others quietly move money from US tech stocks back into crypto. Dalio is just the one who’s broken the silence. That said, when a big name urges people to stock up on crypto, we have to weigh whether he’s genuinely worried about ordinary people or just looking for an audience for his favored direction. After all, Bridgewater’s own positions aren’t transparent to outsiders when he says this. When everyone talks about hedging risks, whether those risks have already been priced in is something no one can say for sure.$SNDK: Trapped in a prolonged downtrend loop, missing out on this round of liquidity dividends So far, $SNDK's historical maximum drawdown has breached the extreme 99% threshold. The unlocking window continues to release selling pressure, and the market shows no signs of marginal decline in selling pressure; the downward momentum shows no obvious signs of exhaustion. In contrast, tokens like BICO, BEAT, ALLO, KAITO, and $APR have precisely capitalized on this round of liquidity easing dividends. Riding the wave of improved market risk appetite, they have entered a highly elastic structural recovery phase. Some tokens have doubled in just half a month, with many coins consecutively breaking through previous key resistance levels, while capital enthusiasm and trading activity continue to rise. Only $SNDK remains trapped in a downtrend loop, continuously weakening. It has neither leveraged the industry narrative of AI storage and enterprise-grade flash demand surges to break the deadlock, nor has it seen substantial ecological benefits materialize to reverse expectations, thus continuously underperforming the broader market during this widespread rally. #Gold breaks through $4600, challenging bonds' safe-haven status Bitcoin has dropped more than 20% in half a year, yet funds are flowing into this sector The first half of the year is almost over, and looking back, Bitcoin hasn’t had a good six months. ArkStream Capital’s latest review laid out the data: Bitcoin fell over 20% in the first half of 2026, driven by the Federal Reserve turning hawkish again, combined with repeated geopolitical tensions between the US and Iran, which crushed many high-leverage positions to the floor. But amid this gloom, one sector quietly attracted large amounts of money. They mentioned that Real World Asset tokenization, or RWA, has grown counter to the trend to $33 billion. The more the market panics, the more funds seek refuge in assets backed by physical or cash flow, completely different from the frenzy of meme coins and chasing dog tokens in the past two years. Breaking it down makes it clearer. This $33 billion isn’t retail gambling money; it’s stablecoins, tokenized government bonds, and private credit—assets with real underlying value. Products like BlackRock’s government bond offerings, Ondo’s on-chain bonds, and Maple’s on-chain lending have quietly been attracting capital over the past six months. This is completely different from the 2021 altcoin pump driven purely by sentiment; RWA has institutions generating real monthly yields behind it. Simply put, big money isn’t after hype, but certainty about where the money is going. What’s even more interesting is the source of the money. In the first half, AI tech stocks almost drained all the risk capital in the market, with Nvidia and OpenAI-related capital frenzy grabbing the same batch of venture funds. But recently, this siphoning has loosened, and some money is flowing back from the AI narrative into crypto, with RWA becoming the main recipient. Players haven’t left the market; they’ve just moved to a more stable table. Previously, we always watched BTC and ETH for rebounds, but now the capital migration path has changed. Those who keep shouting about an altcoin season might have missed that the real new inflows aren’t in dog tokens but in a seemingly boring sector. Of course, some doubt how much of this $33 billion is real demand and how much is just old stories repackaged with a new narrative. After such a big drop in the first half, institutions say they’re in for the long term, but their actions are honest—this split itself shows the market hasn’t truly reached consensus. So here’s the question for you: if this recovery is really led by RWA, are those scared by the drop in the past six months hedging or missing out? Do you think this $33 billion is smart money positioning early, or just another well-packaged narrative?Bitcoin has firmly stood at 78,000 again, and those who haven't gotten on board are starting to panic. The first thing I did this morning was check the market on my phone. The moment the screen lit up, the number 78,000 hit me right in the eyes. Bitcoin has stood back at 78,000, and this is yet another move in this rally from the lows that has left many behind. To be honest, I myself haven't fully settled this week. The previous wave pulled from just over 60,000 all the way to 79,000, with almost no decent pullbacks in between. Many people, like me, got used to reducing positions on rallies during the bear market, but ended up getting lighter and lighter, and by the time we realized it, the price was already overhead. Missing out like this is even more frustrating than being stuck in a losing position; at least with losses you can comfort yourself with long-term holding, but missing out means watching your account barely recover. There are actually clues behind the market moves. This rally isn't driven by retail investors rushing in, but by institutions putting real money on the table. In recent days, BlackRock's spot ETF has seen continuous net inflows, with several hundred million dollars pouring in daily. Plus, the previous short squeeze wiped out a large number of short positions in one go. That 8.19 short squeeze alone liquidated over two billion dollars in shorts, making it one of the biggest days in crypto history. Once the shorts were cleared, the price floated upward with little selling pressure to stop it. Technically, Bitcoin standing back above 78,000 means the previous resistance zone from 75,000 to 78,000, once considered a ceiling, has now become a floor. The short-term average cost lines are turning upward, and ETH has also simultaneously reclaimed 2,500, improving the overall market sentiment significantly. Interestingly, this move isn't just about Bitcoin; retail investors in South Korea have clearly returned, with Upbit's daily trading volume recently doubling, and fresh money flowing in from outside. But we need to stay calm and think. The faster the rise, the sharper the pullback tends to be. This rally has gone up with almost no shakeout, indicating a lot of floating profit inside. Once there's any disturbance, those leveraged longs who chased the rally will be the first to run. Funding rates are already high, and many are borrowing leverage to chase the price up. Crowded trades like this can be vulnerable to a sudden sharp drop that shakes people out. Looking at the bigger picture, the fact that Bitcoin has reclaimed 78,000 means institutions are still slowly accumulating chips, and the long-term logic remains intact. But in the short term, the biggest risk of such a rapid rally is a big bearish candle that kills all the momentum from the chasing traders. My approach is to average down a bit if my position is heavy, and if light, not to go all in immediately. Consider adding only when the price pulls back to around the 75,000 average cost line. Keeping some dry powder feels more comfortable. Did your account turn green this week, or did you perfectly miss that big bullish candle again?Two months ago, those who shouted that the rebound was over are now saying the bear market is finished. Remember two months ago, many people in the circle were still shouting that this round of rebound was already over, and next would be a continued slow decline to find the bottom. Yi Lihua was one of the more outspoken in this camp at the time, publicly stating that the rebound would end in May, mainly focusing on July to August as the last bottom-fishing window, with cautious undertones. So what happened? These days, he directly changed his tune on social media, saying that ever since BTC's daily chart strongly broke through the 120-day and 200-day moving averages, and the weekly chart stood above the 20-week moving average, the bear market trend has officially ended. Just after saying the rebound was over, he immediately announced the bull market is back—his turnaround is faster than the candlesticks. He’s not just speaking casually. The reasons he gave sound solid: multiple moving average systems turning strong simultaneously is a signal of trend reversal in the eyes of technical analysts. He also said he remains bullish for the next two weeks, but after reaching a certain level, there will be a pullback, with the correction not exceeding half of the gains, reminding those using leverage to close some long positions first. That said, institutional ETF accumulation in Q2 is actually not low; big money was quietly positioning in Q1, which aligns with the signals he sees. I just want to ask, when you told us two months ago to watch the last bottom-fishing window, why didn’t you say the bear market could end at any time? Were the moving averages not valid then but valid now? The market is still the same market; what’s really changed—the charts or people’s minds? What’s more worth pondering is the contradiction in his words. On one hand, he says the bear market is over and remains bullish; on the other, he advises leveraged users to close long positions first. This shows he himself knows this rally is too sharp and could bite back at any time. Those who truly believe in a long-term bull market wouldn’t be in such a hurry to have short-term traders exit first. Ultimately, this kind of public turnaround by a big player is itself a barometer of market sentiment. No one dares to shout bull in a bear market; when someone dares to shout it, the bottom is often already formed. But that doesn’t mean you have to follow him blindly. He’s looking at the monthly level, while you’re trading on daily heartbeats—mismatched cycles are the easiest way to lose money. Looking at the bigger picture, what he says isn’t really contradictory. The long-term trend may indeed be turning, but the short-term sharp pullback after a spike is a real risk. Institutions and whales want the right position; we retail traders want the right rhythm. Even if the position is right, if the rhythm is wrong, you still lose. He said it’s going up but didn’t tell you to go all in; understanding the nuance in his words is more important than blindly trusting the conclusion. What do you think? Has Yi Lihua’s turnaround spotted something we haven’t, or is he simply being proven wrong by the rally?RWA has surged to 33 billion, but no one clearly explains what it's really about Just now, the group was buzzing about RWA again. Honestly, this thing has been really strong this year. Institutional data shows the on-chain total market cap has quietly climbed back above $33 billion, and holders have seen nearly a 60% increase in a month. With this momentum, it feels almost embarrassing not to talk about it if you're in crypto. But as we talked, I noticed something strange. Everyone says RWA is the next big narrative, but when you ask what problem RWA actually solves, the group suddenly goes silent. Is it about putting government bonds on-chain? Is it about allowing retail investors to buy fractionalized US debt? Or is it just about giving a bunch of tokens a new skin? I looked around at so-called RWA projects and found many just map real-world assets, hang a certificate on-chain, but actual clearing and ownership confirmation still happen offline in the old system. Simply put, the tokens are just barcodes. When a black swan event hits on a weekend, very few can hold up. This is completely different from what we think of as native on-chain assets. Interestingly, despite Bitcoin dropping more than 20% this year, the Fed turning hawkish, and added geopolitical conflicts, RWA has actually grown counter-trend to 33 billion. Stablecoins make up the majority, and tokenized US debt is quietly expanding. This shows traditional money is looking for an outlet—they don't trust pure crypto assets but are willing to touch tokens with some real-world backing. This capital migration is an incremental gain short-term and a quiet takeover of on-chain by traditional finance long-term. But let's pour some cold water. RWA fears regulation above all. In the US, stablecoin and tokenization rules are still in draft stages; even the CLARITY Act hasn't been finalized. It's still very early to have clarity. How many projects rushing in now will survive until the rules are clear? That's hard to say. I think RWA isn't without opportunity, but that opportunity belongs to players with real asset custody and compliance capabilities, not to those of us who just hype a concept and leave. If you want to see real progress, watch who can truly move clearing and ownership confirmation on-chain, not just hang a name. The stablecoin sector has already been taken over by big institutions; there's little left for small retail players to ride on. Don't be fooled by the current hype. The underlying asset yields of RWA actually follow US debt. Once the Fed really cuts rates, that interest spread advantage won't be so attractive. Then the story may remain, but the money might not. This is the same logic as us speculating on altcoins. What do you think? Is this wave of RWA a real narrative or just another repackaged old story? Kaito relaunched the new plugin for the mouth-typing economy, but no one dares to install it Kaito has picked up the mouth-typing economy again these days and released a new plugin, claiming it will allow creators' real influence to be verified by data. It sounds like a good thing; the platform finally wants to seriously address the issue of fake traffic. But reality slapped us faster than expected. Once the plugin came out, the group was full of hesitation, and very few actually installed it. Why? Because installing this thing means handing over more data to the platform—browsing history, interaction trails, all must be submitted. The platform says it's to verify real influence, but users think, is my privacy being fed to models again? This contrast is especially ironic. On one side, the project team shouts about rewarding real contributions; on the other, users fear their data will become someone else's nourishment. During the previous InfoFi round, many people worked hard to earn a bunch of points, only to find out that token distribution still depended on the project team's mood—what a waste of effort. Now that it's back, everyone has learned their lesson: verbally supportive but hands off. More subtly, Kaito's logic essentially trades data for attention monetization. The platform needs more behavioral data to score influence, and users need the platform's traffic and tokens. But once data is handed over, the balance tips completely toward the project team. If the rules change one day, past contributions can just vanish. The KOLs who promote and lead orders in the circle are happy to take it since they can prove their real influence, but what about us ordinary players? For those of us playing with memes and knockoffs, this new narrative tests our resolve the most. The prettier the story, the more you have to ask, why am I the one losing out? Back in the day, how many projects shouting decentralized and fair distribution actually delivered? The end of mouth-typing often means the project team drained your data, and you only got a handful of air. To be blunt, the more such plugins emphasize protecting users, the more cautious you should be. Once privacy is handed over, it can't be taken back. Don't even mention if the project team changes their mind or if the database gets hacked—your social graph is all in there. Aren't there enough platforms in crypto that have been hacked or phished? My attitude remains the same: new things can be observed, but don't rush to give yourself away. Let others be the guinea pigs first, see the distribution rules clearly before taking action. After all, in crypto, the most expensive tuition is often trust misplaced. Will you install this plugin, or just keep watching from the sidelines? The exchange that promised to operate as usual has already prepared a shutdown plan. BitMart wrote a sentence in its announcement these past two days that many might have skimmed over and forgotten. It is formulating a potential restructuring plan, which exists as an alternative to a complete shutdown. In other words, this well-established exchange, which opened in 2017 and has accumulated many users worldwide, is already preparing a fallback for itself. This situation did not come without warning. BitMart hired top law firm White & Case as restructuring advisors, stating it plans to gradually resume partial operations in an orderly manner and then distribute assets to creditors. However, it also made it clear that this is only a possible option; legal, financial, and regulatory aspects still need further evaluation, with an update promised to the market by September 9 at the latest. Comparing the before and after feels off. A few months ago, it was still actively onboarding new users, listing coins, and running promotions, with a lively website. But behind the scenes, it has already started assuming the worst-case scenario—that the exchange might not be able to continue operating. An exchange outwardly operating as usual while holding a shutdown contingency plan is a contrast that truly signals something to watch. Just as Bitcoin surged to 78,000 and the whole network was shouting that the bull market is back, one exchange quietly prepared a fallback plan for itself. The busier the market, the easier it is to overlook such quiet signals. But historically, every real turning point often doesn’t happen when everyone is panicking, but when they feel safest. BitMart’s contingency plan reminds us that the platform’s dignity and user security have never been the same thing. Many people’s impression of BitMart still lingers on how it was years ago, thinking it’s at least a veteran operating for nearly nine years and unlikely to fail. But precisely mid-tier platforms are the easiest to get squeezed from both ends. When the market cools, trading volume drops sharply, but compliance costs rise year after year, and those who can’t hold on are often this group. Once it reaches the restructuring stage, users inside are no longer customers but creditors. How much you can get back depends on the liquidation and distribution results, which may not match the balance on your account. We are used to leaving coins on exchanges for convenience, but when a crisis hits, whether your withdrawal channel remains stable becomes the most realistic issue. BitMart now says it can slowly recover, but no one can guarantee where that bottom line is. Are the coins you have there really always accessible? Don’t wait until the announcement of a shutdown to start thinking about this.A trillion-dollar valued company includes dislike of AI in its prospectus A company that hasn't gone public yet, with a private valuation approaching one trillion dollars, is preparing its IPO documents. Normally, for a company of this scale, the prospectus would focus on growth stories, moats, and market size. But recently, at a closed-door meeting with banks and investors, Anthropic sent an unexpected signal: they plan to formally include the public's negative sentiment towards artificial intelligence as a risk factor in their prospectus. Anthropic is the cutting-edge lab behind Claude, belonging to the same top tier as OpenAI. According to CNBC, its current annualized revenue run rate has exceeded $65 billion, with a private valuation close to one trillion dollars, and it is preparing for a major IPO in the coming weeks. Such a player at the peak of the wave is the first to admit that the storm might backfire. What’s unusual here is that risk factors in prospectuses are usually hard issues like competition, regulation, or technical failures. Listing public sentiment as a risk means acknowledging that ordinary people's dislike is no longer just noise but a variable that can affect valuation, trigger regulation, and translate into real costs. Their concerns are very specific: fears of AI taking jobs, controversies over electricity and water resources caused by nationwide frantic data center expansions, and community resistance to ultra-large-scale projects. Even more intriguing is the investors' reaction. At the exploratory meeting, everyone kept asking whether open-source models would crush profit margins, and what chain reactions would occur if data center construction slowed down. They verbally proclaim changing the world but honestly calculate how long this feast can last. Looking at the bigger picture, it’s worth pondering. This year, the market has been saying AI capital expenditures are being built up through debt, with compute-related debt alone reaching nearly $500 billion. We have also written before that Google and global AI debt totaling about $489 billion are competing for the same pool of risk capital. When the leading AI companies themselves start putting public sentiment warnings in their documents, will the narrative premium of trillions of dollars begin to loosen one day? Over the past year, AI and crypto have been competing for the same pool of risk capital and the same narrative attention. We previously wrote that RWA rose counter-trend to $33 billion partly because funds siphoned by AI began to flow back. When AI itself starts issuing warnings, where that money will shift is something every position holder should consider. How much longer do you think this AI craze can last? When the bull market is at its peak, an exchange quietly prepares to exit BTC surged to 79,000 this week, the entire network glowing green, and even the air is filled with the sound of a bull market comeback. But just when everyone feels safest, a mid-tier exchange called BitMart is reported to be quietly preparing a restructuring plan. The news comes from ChainCatcher, saying BitMart has engaged restructuring advisor White & Case to draft a potential restructuring plan. Note, this is not an ordinary business adjustment; it treats a complete shutdown as the baseline, with restructuring only as an alternative. The document is very straightforward, promising an update to the market before September 9. Consider the timing. BTC breaks 79,000, ETH rises nearly 10% in a day, institutional ETFs see continuous net inflows, and whales are adding positions—the whole industry seems to be celebrating. Yet, at this critical moment, someone is already preparing an exit strategy. I'm not really surprised. Looking back over the past two weeks, the dark side of the chain hasn't stopped. Poolin mining pool just filed for bankruptcy protection, Starbridge Capital's London gold liquidation caused thousands to lose everything, and even MANTRA froze an entire chain due to a security incident. The better the market, the more unstable platforms with weak foundations tend to be exposed, because the surge in traffic and withdrawal pressure quickly bursts the usual prosperity bubble. BitMart is not a fly-by-night exchange; it’s a mid-tier veteran. But this position is the most awkward: overshadowed by giants like Binance, OKX, Coinbase, losing a large share of traffic; below it, many new exchanges compete for users with high rebates. The bull market allows them to catch a breath with trading volume, but once the wind changes, they are often the first to collapse. The daily routine of such platforms is to earn some fee spread in the gaps between big exchanges. When the market rises, they are the first to push high-yield financial products and low-quality coins to users; when the market cools, users rush to withdraw, and reserves may not be enough to hide the problem. BitMart may not have reached that point yet, but the very act of hiring restructuring advisors indicates the books have been calculated more than once. What we should be most concerned about now is the money of the users on the platform. Restructuring does not mean running away, but history tells us that once such alternative plans reach the shutdown stage, withdrawal channels are often blocked first. Especially for retail investors still holding small coins inside, waiting for them to double, by the time the announcement comes and they act, they are often at the end of the line. Before the update on September 9, can you really sleep well with assets left inside? The busier the market, the more you need to look back and see who is quietly fastening their seatbelt. While others are leveraging up and charging forward, someone is already thinking about how to exit gracefully. This video is more systematic than the previous one, explaining Ray Dalio's "Big Cycle" theory in a complete framework, not just the timeline of the US debt crisis. I'll break it down for you and then explain what it means for you. **The video covers four core levels:** **Level 1: Wealth is not equal to money.** The ratio of global financial assets (stocks, bonds, real estate) to actual hard currency reaches 8.5:1. What does this mean? It means that on paper, everyone looks wealthy, but if everyone tries to cash out at the same time, there simply isn't enough money to cover it. During prosperous times, everyone benefits, but when a crisis hits, it becomes a stampede—everyone wants to sell, but there are no buyers, and asset prices drop to zero. This is why "cash is king in a crisis." **Level 2: We are currently in the sixth phase of the big cycle.** Dalio divides the rise and fall of nations into several stages. The sixth phase is characterized by: high debt relying on borrowing to repay old debt, wealth gaps causing internal division, and intensified external conflicts. A key phrase in the video is—"investment logic shifts from efficiency to safety." In the globalization era, companies built factories where costs were lowest; now countries are reshoring supply chains, imposing sanctions and tariffs. Efficiency yields to safety, which itself drives inflation. **Level 3: Inflation is the only cure.** Governments facing debt crises have two choices: either allow default and economic collapse or print money to dilute debt. Politically, no one chooses the first option, so printing money is inevitable. The essence of printing money is "hidden default"—the government doesn't renege, but the purchasing power of the money repaid declines. Those holding cash get eaten by inflation; those holding hard assets benefit. **Level 4: Three personal recommendations.** First, keep 22-24 months of rigid expenses in hard currency cash; second, gold is a ballast, not a profit tool; third, reduce leverage and avoid "rigid debt paired with flexible income"—for example, your monthly mortgage is rigid, but your salary and investment returns are flexible. If income drops, debt will drag you down. --- **Difference from the previous video:** The previous video said "Dalio predicts the US debt crisis will erupt within 3 years," which is a timing judgment. This video explains "why it will erupt, the underlying logic, and what individuals should do," focusing on framework and methodology. Watching both videos together gives a complete picture. But I want to remind you: this video was released on August 15, a week earlier than the previous one, based on Dalio's earlier articles. Both videos actually discuss the same theoretical system but emphasize different points. Don't treat them as two independent "new warnings." --- **My practical judgment for you:** **First, the valuable parts.** "Keep 22-24 months of rigid expenses in cash" is very practical advice. You currently have about 40,000 USDT waiting to be allocated, plus your spot holdings, so liquidity is sufficient. But this advice doesn't mean holding large amounts of cash idle—in an inflationary logic, holding cash long-term guarantees losses. It means: ensure you can live normally even if you have no income for two years, then invest the rest. You can calculate this number yourself; if already met, allocate the remaining USDT as needed without hoarding cash just because "a crisis is coming." "Gold is a ballast, not a profit tool"—I strongly agree with this. You have XAU (gold) in your watchlist, but your main battlefield is crypto. Gold's role is hedging—when stocks crash and crypto crashes, gold usually stabilizes or even rises. It won't give you 10x returns but helps you sleep peacefully during extreme markets. If you allocate, 5%-10% is enough, no need for 15%, because your risk tolerance is clearly higher than traditional investors. "Reduce leverage and avoid rigid debt paired with flexible income" directly relates to your contract trading. You use 10x leverage on contracts, which is a typical "rigid debt paired with flexible income"—once the position goes against you, losses are rigid and immediate. You control risk by using 100U small positions per trade, which actually follows Dalio's advice: you know leverage is dangerous, so you limit max loss by position size rather than stop loss. This approach is correct. But be careful: total contract positions should not exceed 200U; this discipline must be maintained. **Now, the parts I think need discounting.** Dalio's big cycle theory is a "historical philosophy," not an exact science. He explains the rise and fall of the Netherlands, Britain, and the US within one framework, which sounds convincing, but history doesn't simply repeat. The Dutch guilder lost reserve currency status over hundreds of years; the British pound's decline spanned two world wars. The US situation is indeed deteriorating, but the "sixth phase" could last a decade or longer. You can't just sell all stocks tomorrow or go all-in on gold and bitcoin because "we are in the sixth phase." The most anxiety-inducing but least useful phrase in the video is "world order collapse." Such grand narratives sound scary but have no actionable value for your investment decisions. The world order won't suddenly collapse one day; it's a slow process. What you really need to focus on are specific signals: US debt auction demand, Federal Reserve balance sheet, dollar index, inflation data. These are actionable. **Bitcoin's position in this framework is interesting.** Dalio says "allocate a small amount to Bitcoin," not treating Bitcoin on par with gold but at a "small amount" level. This shows Wall Street's old money attitude toward Bitcoin: acknowledging its value but not yet willing to heavily invest. This is actually positive for Bitcoin—if one day someone like Dalio says "recommend 15% Bitcoin allocation," that might be a top signal because even the most conservative are rushing in. Now he only says "small amount," indicating institutional funds are still in early entry, consistent with our previous judgment of the "second phase of the bull market." Don't let paper wealth fool your sense of security; hard assets outperform cash long-term; control leverage and maintain liquidity. Your portfolio structure (mainly spot + small contract positions + USDT cash reserve) basically fits this framework, no major adjustments needed. Continue to wait for pullbacks to build BTC/ETH/SOL positions, keep the 100U per trade discipline on contracts, and allocate 5%-10% gold on pullbacks as ballast. Dalio's big trend is real, but it unfolds slower than you think; don't let grand narratives disrupt your trading rhythm.The big coin is skyrocketing, but traders say it won't break 100,000 this year Killa, a name that should be familiar to old crypto circles. In mid-April, he shorted BTC at $74,688, and on June 5, when the market dropped broadly, he flipped to long. On platform X, 200,000 followers watch his moves. Yesterday, he posted his latest view, summed up in one sentence: I still am optimistic about the market, but I seriously doubt BTC will break $100,000 this year. This statement is a bit of a downer given the current situation. The big coin just surged from over 60,000 all the way to nearly 80,000, with nearly $3 billion in short positions liquidated across the network. Groups are shouting bull returns and main upward waves, even Standard Chartered came out saying it might hit 126,000 by year-end. Yet a trader known for BTC quant strategies poured cold water, saying he expects a range-bound consolidation, first accumulating positions again after the initial rally, a strategy very similar to the 2022 cycle. This isn't his first accurate call. In May 2025, he predicted the peak of that bull market, so his doubts are worth listening to. The logic is simple: the recent rally was driven by short squeezes, not genuine spot demand with real money stepping in. The rise was fast, making the foundation weak. Those who track moving averages (average cost lines) know that after quickly moving away from the cost zone, the pullback is often harsher than expected. Look at what positions were liquidated this time. Of the nearly $3 billion, the vast majority were shorts—bears forced to cut losses and close positions, pushing prices up, not bulls actively adding. This kind of short squeeze causes a sharp rise, but once the liquidation wave passes, without new money stepping in, the rally easily fizzles. Killa is essentially betting on this breather. The market impact is direct. If it really oscillates within a range, those chasing highs are most likely to lose. In the short term, the 78,000 to 80,000 level has become the dividing line between bulls and bears; if it can't hold, a pullback to around 70,000 is likely. Killa’s own plan is clear: before the next move, accumulate ammo again, no rush to chase. Swing traders shouldn’t get caught up by a single bullish candle; position management is far more important than guessing direction. That’s why he explicitly says not to chase, preferring to earn less than to catch a falling knife, waiting for a pullback to buy is always more comfortable than chasing highs. I actually find this contrast quite healthy. When everyone is shouting bull, someone calmly saying wait for a pullback shows the market hasn’t reached a frenzy peak. Being bullish long-term and cautious locally are not contradictory; the real danger is one-sided madness. Are you going all in or holding ammo waiting for the pullback he mentioned?RSI 85 can't stop the chase for highs!!! Only a drop can bring calm!!!! On August 22, $BTC plunged from $79,520 to $76,500 within 15 minutes after hitting $79,520, staging a "pump and dump." Those chasing above $79,000 were once again left hanging at the peak. All technical indicators are flashing red. RSI soared to 85.99, the most severe overbought level since November 2024; ADX hit a historic extreme of 87.4, indicating trend momentum is near exhaustion; the bid-ask ratio is only 0.10, with sell orders ten times the buy orders. The key support is at $75,000; if it doesn't hold, the next stops are $73,000 or even $71,000. On the news front: the best bullish news is already priced in, which is the biggest bearish factor. The core driver of this rally was the US Treasury doubling its bond repurchase scale to $4 billion, but the Treasury clearly stated "this is not quantitative easing," yet the market treated it as QE—crypto markets gave the Treasury far more credit than its actual value. Coupled with Trump's regulatory pressure and continuous ETF inflows, all the positives have been priced in, leaving only a correction. Essentially, this is a short squeeze wrapped in a liquidity story. A large number of short positions accumulated over six weeks of consolidation were liquidated in a chain reaction, creating a self-reinforcing squeeze spiral. But once most shorts are cleared, buying momentum naturally dries up. Next, keep a close eye on whether $75,000 holds, and on the speech by Federal Reserve Chair Wash at Jackson Hole on August 28. Don't forget who's quietly counting money at the peak of the frenzy. #BTC延续强势，资金流能否持续？ BlackRock bought up 11,000 BTC in two days Lookonchain's on-chain monitoring released a set of data yesterday showing that BlackRock bought 11,098 BTC worth $852 million over the past two days, along with 132,769 ETH worth $316 million. In total, they invested over $1.1 billion in real cash within two days. Institutional ETF net inflows are direct evidence of institutions buying crypto with real money. This wave of buying happened as Bitcoin rallied from just over 60,000 to nearly 80,000, indicating that not only retail investors and leveraged traders were bottom-fishing, but big money was quietly entering the market as well. BlackRock's Bitcoin ETF IBIT has accumulated a total net inflow of $62.1 billion historically, and Fidelity's FBTC has also surpassed $10 billion. Including ETH makes it even more interesting. The purchase of over 130,000 ETH in two days, against the backdrop of staking reaching new highs, shows that institutions are not only interested in BTC as a hard asset but are also increasing exposure to ETH's on-chain yield (staking rewards). BlackRock, at this scale, treats crypto as an asset class for allocation, not just a quick trade. The background is that Bitcoin ETF net inflows hit $1.6 billion for the entire week, the largest single week since the peak in October last year. BlackRock is just the most aggressive among them. Continuous big-money buying often signals a trend more clearly than a single bullish candle. Don't misinterpret this as institutions issuing trading calls. BlackRock is buying for long-term allocation; their funds don't have stop-loss concepts and are not the same as our leveraged short-term plays. Following the direction is fine, but copying the timing blindly can lead to losses. The contrast is quite clear. While our group is still debating whether the bull market has returned, BlackRock has already voted with their wallet. Institutions of this scale build positions in batches, not all at once, so their cost range is likely between 60,000 and over 70,000. For us, this means there is institutional support at the bottom, but it doesn't mean an immediate surge. From a market perspective, continuous institutional net inflows provide solid support for mid-term sentiment. In the short term, don't get carried away chasing after a single bullish candle. The buying rhythm of institutions tells us they are looking at weekly-level allocations, not intraday price differences. If you really want to follow big money, dollar-cost averaging or waiting for a pullback to buy is much more comfortable than chasing highs. After all, institutions build positions based on quarterly returns, while we profit from daily volatility; the rhythms are simply on different scales. Do you think BlackRock's recent buying is bottom accumulation or adding to positions mid-way? Will their cost range become a strong support level going forward? CFTC is about to set rules for prediction markets CFTC Chairman Selig recently made it clear on social media: Congress has granted exclusive regulatory authority over prediction markets to the CFTC, and not only do we want that authority, we also want to establish the rules. Simply put, prediction market platforms like Polymarket will have to operate within a compliance framework designed by the CFTC, and states will be blocked from using anti-gambling laws to regulate them. This matter is more related to the crypto world than it appears on the surface. In recent years, prediction markets have increasingly been used to speculate on politics, macroeconomics, and even cryptocurrency price trends. Essentially, they are decentralized betting pools combined with information aggregators. Once the CFTC clarifies the rules, it means these platforms will have a legal status in the U.S. and will no longer be wildcards in a gray area. The contrast is striking: on one hand, regulators have been calling for years to crack down on chaos; on the other hand, when it comes to implementation, they are handing out birth certificates to prediction markets. Simply put, regulation is more beneficial than prohibition, and bringing them under control is cheaper than shutting them down. The key phrase is "exclusive regulatory authority." It means the federal government takes jurisdiction outright, and state governments can no longer use local gambling laws to crack down on these platforms one by one. For products like Polymarket, which have users across the U.S., a unified federal rulebook is much friendlier than fifty different state laws. Looking ahead, it gets even more interesting. Platforms like Polymarket settle on-chain and use stablecoins for betting. Regulatory recognition is equivalent to issuing a pass for an entire prediction market blockchain and protocol. The CFTC had previously sued it, but now it’s about to set rules to protect it — a 180-degree turnaround. For players involved in related tokens and protocols, this marks a watershed moment from being a rogue operation to becoming a legitimate entity. The impact on ordinary players like us is not direct, but the signal is important. A clear regulatory framework reduces concerns for institutional capital entering the space, which is a generally positive long-term factor. Moreover, this is part of a broader regulatory warming trend in crypto this year, with proposals like Reg Crypto and the CLARITY Act moving forward. Regulation is shifting from crackdowns to rule-setting. Actual implementation will take time — from proposal to enforcement will take at least half a year, so don’t treat this as a short-term catalyst. Prediction market concept stocks in the U.S. stock market might see some speculative gains first, but that’s someone else’s game. Have you ever played prediction markets? Do you treat them as a sentiment indicator or do you actually place bets? How far is the US from QE after Bassett's market rescue? Many people were stunned by Bassett's recent moves. The Treasury is expanding the scale of bond buybacks while sending stronger intervention signals on long-term interest rates. Some in the market are starting to ask: Is the US about to restart QE? Let's clarify the tricky conclusion first. Buybacks and QE are not the same. Buybacks involve the Treasury using money to repurchase its own issued debt, mainly suppressing short-term rates and injecting some liquidity into the market; QE is when the central bank directly steps in to buy bonds, which is the real money printing. What Bassett is doing now looks more like the former, with limited scale, still far from the central bank level of money printing. Simply put, Bassett is using fiscal tools; real QE would require the Federal Reserve to give the green light, and Powell is still holding firm verbally. Some in the group attribute the entire recent rebound to Bassett, but I think that's an overstatement. The August 19 rebound was mainly due to short squeezes; Bassett just added some icing on the cake. But the market definitely thrives on liquidity. If you look at the negative correlation between crypto prices and the US dollar index, it has become more obvious over the past two months: when the dollar weakens, Bitcoin strengthens. But the signals can't be ignored. The story for 2026 runs throughout the year: stubborn inflation, worsening fiscal conditions, foreign buyer retreat, pushing long-term bond yields structurally higher. The 30-year US Treasury yield once surged to 5.34%, a high since 2007. The government can't sit still and has started to intervene on the long end. The direct logic for crypto is simple: when liquidity eases, risk assets get a breather. Bitcoin's recent rebound from 60,000 to nearly 80,000 was partly driven by the Treasury suppressing long-term yields and a warming risk appetite. If the Fed ever turns dovish or even restarts QE, that would be real fuel for a major crypto bull run. But don't get too excited yet. QE is the arch-enemy of inflation, and CPI hasn't fully softened. Restarting QE now would be self-defeating. So it's more likely to be buybacks combined with verbal support; real money printing still depends on the Fed's stance. In the short term, don't overinterpret; Bassett is currently just providing a floor, not opening the floodgates. On a broader scale, you can use US Treasury yields and the dollar index as indicators: if both go down, crypto pressure eases. For contract traders like us, the worst is conflicting macro expectations that cause market volatility with every news change, so don't over-leverage; leave some room to wait for the dust to settle. Do you think the US will really restart QE this year, or is it just verbal support?BlackRock swept up 11,000 BTC in two days On-chain data monitoring shows that in the past two days, BlackRock quietly bought 11,100 bitcoins, worth about $8.7 billion at current prices, while also increasing its holdings by 132,800 Ethereum, valued at about $3.4 billion. Together, these two purchases exceed $12 billion, nearly 90 billion RMB. Interestingly, this buying spree happened at a time when the market was most divided. On one side, major exchanges were debating whether Bitcoin could hold above 78,000 and push to 80,000, while retail investors repeatedly asked in groups whether they should get in; on the other side, funds at BlackRock’s level didn’t wait for any consensus and simply filled their positions in two days. This pace is like a wholesale buyer taking the entire truckload while market shoppers are still picking through the produce. Looking back, this isn’t the first time BlackRock has done this. In late August during this rally, its ETF saw weekly net inflows hit $1.6 billion, with average holder cost around 84,000. Earlier, there was a $120 million Ethereum buy within two hours, called the largest single purchase in nearly seven months at the time. But this recent two-day purchase of 11,000 BTC clearly marks a new scale. Some have calculated that just the IBIT product’s holdings are approaching or exceeding the official reserves of many countries. When traditional asset managers include Bitcoin as a portfolio asset, they’re not concerned about tomorrow’s price moves but about whether currency will depreciate over the next three to five years and whether institutions will continue allocating. This logic is on a completely different level from retail traders who get excited over every candlestick on their phone. Many focus on intraday charts asking if the price will rise or fall tomorrow, but institutions look at a different dimension. Bitcoin spot ETFs open the door for traditional capital to enter; pension funds, endowments, family offices don’t need to manage wallets or private keys themselves—they just buy fund shares. BlackRock’s IBIT, listed on US stock markets, is already one of the largest single Bitcoin holders globally. The more it buys, the deeper the bond between traditional finance and Bitcoin, making the price easier to support by these massive funds. But with deeper integration comes another side of the story. As more coins get locked in institutional products, will market pricing power gradually shift from miners and retail investors to a few Wall Street firms? We used to pride ourselves on Bitcoin’s decentralization and being ungovernable, but now one of the largest holders might be a suit-and-tie asset management giant. A more practical issue is that as ETFs and compliant channels widen, ordinary people’s way to access Bitcoin has shifted from managing their own wallets to buying funds. The threshold lowers, but the rules of the game change. This contrast is more worth pondering than short-term candlestick shadows. Ultimately, whether BlackRock buys or not is never a signal for us; it only answers to its clients. But so much money voting with its feet carries more weight than any analyst’s call. The most important question now is: when BlackRock quietly swept up 11,000 BTC in two days, were we waiting for a cheaper entry point, or have we already spent the most certain part of the rally hesitating? After the short squeeze aftermath: the crazier the market, the harsher the pullback scythe The violent surge in the market is also the process where most traders rapidly lose their rationality. Currently, the sentiment in overseas markets has completely entered a frenzy, with voices everywhere predicting BTC to hit a new high of 150,000. The bullish market sentiment has reached an extreme. But one must stay clear-headed: when market euphoria reaches its peak, it is often the moment when the harvesting scythe is ready to fall. The Ministry of Finance suppressing long-term bond yields, optimistic 100,000 targets, and near 1 billion in short-term large ETF purchases—these driving factors are solid in themselves. But the key is that the market has already priced in and fully digested this series of positive news in advance. Rushing in recklessly now is not about mid-to-long-term positioning; essentially, it’s rushing up to stand guard for early main funds to offload. The 4-hour RSI has already surged above 90, a typical overbought, speculative frenzy zone, far from a safe position to build a position. Many think they are bravely chasing the trend, but in reality, they are helping early rally funds complete turnover and exit. Just listen to the voices hyping a new high of 150,000, no need to rush in. Wait until this wave of frenzied bubble cools down fully—that will be a safer entry window. The president who denied intervening in the bond market left a chilling remark On August 21 local time, Trump was asked a very sensitive question at Andrews Joint Base in Maryland: Did you privately instruct Treasury Secretary Yellen to intervene in the bond market? His answer was straightforward, saying absolutely not, it was Yellen herself who felt the need to act, and she has a good intuition about bonds and interest rates. But in the same speech, he added a sentence that sent chills down the market's spine. He said the ultimate intervention to solve the national debt problem is the U.S. military, which will act when necessary. He just denied directing the bond market but then put missiles on the table. When asked how to repay the $40 trillion debt, he said this hole has existed for 35 years and can be easily solved by growth, which is currently very strong. This matter cannot be viewed in isolation. The U.S. debt just surpassed $40 trillion, and Yellen has been extending long-term bond repurchases recently to try to suppress yields. Wall Street's reaction is divided; some call it quasi-quantitative easing, while JPMorgan directly poured cold water, saying it's like using a credit card to pay a mortgage—treating symptoms, not the root cause. A few days ago, we also saw mysterious funds precisely positioning in ultra-long-term U.S. bond ETFs, and Bank of America warned that if repurchases fail, it could trigger a short-selling wave. The entire bond market storyline has been running for almost two weeks. Now the president personally steps in, first shifting responsibility to Yellen's intuition, then casually elevating the military as the ultimate trump card. If you say he’s not touching the bond market, he’s clearly talking about how to suppress yields; if you say he intervened, he says others acted on their own. This back-and-forth itself sends a signal: the $40 trillion hole is too big to fill with words alone. For us, the logic is actually straightforward. This round of Bitcoin rally from 64,000 to 78,000 is largely fueled by liquidity expectations brought by Treasury repurchases. When the bond market loosens, risk assets dare to rise. But once the military option is put on the table, the geopolitical factor will pull risk appetite back. The crazier the rise, the more you have to watch the bond market’s mood. So the real question arises. Can growth really easily swallow $40 trillion, or in the end, will everyone have to pay for this trump card? What do you think is the key to this rebound—the Federal Reserve or the president’s words?In July, US CPI, PPI, and GDP economic data weakened. Normally, US Treasury yields should decline, but the 30-year Treasury yield instead hit a nearly 20-year high. After the launch of the Besent US Treasury repurchase program, yields quickly fell, signaling that the risk-free rate may enter a downward cycle, which is a significant positive for gold and cryptocurrencies. There are two reasons for this strong rally in gold and cryptocurrencies: First: The expectation of declining US Treasury yields catalyzed the move. Second: A large accumulation of shorts during the previous long consolidation phase, combined with a series of events and news, triggered an extreme short squeeze. This was essentially a black swan event for the shorts, and this liquidation ranks among the top 10 in history. As I mentioned before, the market was like a spring compressed for too long; gold and crypto, after a prolonged consolidation and buildup of momentum, surged uncontrollably, sending shorts back home to their moms. Do not chase longs; it’s better to stay out than to catch the tail end. The upside for this round of gold and crypto rally is limited. Gold and crypto surged on expectations of rate cuts and short squeezes. Don’t fantasize about Bitcoin directly hitting 100,000 or Ethereum reaching 4,000. Statistically, such a direct surge is unlikely. Whether the market can fully reverse depends on a key indicator: whether the Federal Reserve will implement rate cuts by the end of the year. The weakening US economy provides conditions for the Fed to start easing and cutting rates. Currently, overall market liquidity remains tight, and the long-term risks of high interest rates are significant. The market is merely betting in advance on the Fed’s expected rate cuts by year-end. If easing truly materializes, cheap capital will first flow to higher-return AI technology, and only then will it trickle down to the crypto and gold markets. Risk reminder: Fed rate cuts are only market expectations and may not be realized, especially with the unpredictable Wash administration, whose words and actions are inconsistent. US Treasuries, interest rates, and macroeconomics are a multivariable game; a single data point or an official’s statement can rewrite the market. If expectations are disappointed, gold and crypto will experience a waterfall correction.#BTC continues its strong momentum, can the capital flow sustain? BTC has surged nearly 20% in three days, approaching 78000, with ETF net inflows exceeding 1.5 billion in three days — is this a short squeeze frenzy or a trend reversal? OKX spot BTC has gained nearly 20% cumulatively over the past three days, breaking the previous low volatility pattern completely. ETH is also strengthening synchronously, showing relatively strong performance in the last 24 hours. ETF funds: From short squeeze to diffusion into spot buying, from August 19 to 21, US spot crypto ETF capital flow showed a "gradual strengthening" trend: Capital is spreading from early short covering to ETF and spot buying, which is a positive trend signal. During this rapid rally, shorts were heavily squeezed, with liquidation scale once approaching 2.7-3 billion USD, forming the core driving force of the "short squeeze rally." The key variables going forward, whether this rally can shift from a short squeeze to a more stable trend recovery, depend on: 1. Whether ETF funds can continue to absorb profit-taking sales — this is the most critical variable 2. Whether stablecoin liquidity follows — whether incremental funds enter the market 3. Whether the 77000-78000 USD range can hold — determining if the short squeeze yields to the trend If the high-level oscillation today cannot maintain high inflows later, the pressure from profit-taking at high levels may continue to release rapidly. $BTC $ETH HYPE surged 27% overnight, backed by the same group behind the scenes Last night, the entire market was rising, but the strongest performer was still HYPE. It surged nearly 27% in one day, with the price hitting $73.9, just under $3 away from the all-time high of $76.5, ending nearly two months of a slow decline and sideways movement. But what really ignited the rally wasn’t any technical upgrade; earlier, Wall Street had quietly been building HYPE exposure through PURR, and protocol fees started being counted this month, laying the groundwork that gave today’s surge confidence. The direct catalyst was a statement from Trump at a crypto meeting in the White House, where he mentioned that the US CFTC chairman is pushing for Hyperliquid to enter the US market in full compliance. A supposedly permissionless, decentralized on-chain contract platform suddenly being endorsed by the president himself—that scene is quite surreal. Even more intriguing is the network behind it. The current CFTC chairman, Selig, didn’t just randomly take an interest in Hyperliquid. When the platform submitted two regulatory opinion letters on perpetual contracts to the CFTC last year, the drafter was former CFTC chairman Giancarlo. Giancarlo and Selig were mentor and mentee at the CFTC years ago and later worked together at the same law firm for three years. Before Selig took office, his mentor publicly supported him multiple times. After this roundabout path, Hyperliquid, leveraging the former chairman as a lawyer, has connected with the current chairman and may actually obtain that compliance entry ticket. The platform itself hasn’t been idle. On August 18, Hyperliquid’s Policy Center and trade.xyz jointly wrote to the SEC, proposing to include pre-IPO perpetual contracts in the reform framework, allowing retail investors to bet on prices before the stock officially lists. They have already launched five such markets on-chain, including Cerebras and SpaceX. These on-chain pre-listing prices sometimes closely match the official opening prices, effectively providing issuers with an additional public price signal. Among feasible implementation paths, Policy Center CEO Chervinsky favors cooperating with licensed institutions for the clearing layer, where the partner handles KYC and reporting, and Hyperliquid manages only the on-chain process. Whichever path is taken, it will take at least three to five months, possibly up to a year, from implementation to full operation. But here lies the problem. A protocol that started as permissionless and self-custodied, once it adds KYC, whitelists, and clearing gates for compliance, is it still the same thing? The market has clearly chosen excitement first, pushing the price to historic highs. When the Washington hype fades, what everyone may face is another question: when decentralization starts bowing to regulation, does the most valuable part of it still remain?With the US stock market closed over the weekend, $COHR derivative tokens plunged 7.26%, significantly underperforming the Nasdaq 100 tokens' 0.58% decline. The core issue centers on the absence of an underlying stock price anchor, leading to overheated expectations backfiring and chip squeeze triggered by moving average breakdowns. Currently, $COHR is quoted at 275.85, with the daily RSI14 dropping to 33.0, MACD showing a bearish crossover with expanding green bars, and the price falling below both MA7 and MA25, which are arranged in a bearish alignment. Compared to the slight declines in major tech stock tokens, this asset exposed extremely high premium correction pressure during the US market closure. In terms of driving factors, the primary cause is the lack of an underlying US stock trading anchor, while weak on-chain liquidity amplifies sentiment volatility. Secondly, Nvidia's comments on optical interconnects have triggered market reconsideration of overheated expectations for optical modules and storage sectors, compounded by Yahoo's assessment of cheap cash flow but fully priced-in profit expectations, suppressing willingness to buy at high levels. The bullish scenario requires strong dip-buying inflows into the underlying stock after the US market opens Monday, enabling the token to complete an oversold recovery and false breakdown confirmation. If the underlying stock quickly recovers the moving averages at open and RSI14 rises above 40, short-term bearish squeeze will push the token to recoup weekend losses; the invalidation signal for this scenario is the underlying stock opening lower and continuing to fall. The bearish scenario is based on accelerated technical breakdown. If the MACD green bars further expand and the underlying stock fails to form effective support at open, the 7/25 moving average bearish pressure will trigger deeper selling pressure, and the token price will follow the moving averages downward seeking liquidity support; the invalidation signal is a gap-up rebound at the underlying stock open. When the underlying stock's trading volume significantly expands after the US market opens and quickly erases the weekend token losses, the bearish projection is invalidated. Overall Nasdaq liquidity recovery and token premium narrowing will directly restructure the bullish defense framework. Key focus for the next 24 hours is to observe the underlying stock's opening performance and volume support after the US market opens Monday, as well as the premium convergence speed between the token and the underlying stock. #美光加码AI存储，十年研发投入100亿美元 #三星股东回报落地，最高约800亿美元 #BTC延续强势，资金流能否持续？Castle quickly dumped 80% of its AI chips and made a huge profit During the tech stock crash at the end of July, one name was repeatedly mentioned: Leopold Aschenbrunner, known as the investment prodigy of the AI era, with some in the industry even comparing him to this generation's Buffett. The fund he manages grew from $200 million at the end of 2024 to over $40 billion, relying heavily on a handful of AI growth stocks and leveraging several times over. But when the black July storm hit, the myth shattered instantly. At the end of June, just before the storm, his top six holdings were clear: SanDisk, Micron, and computing power rental companies Nebius and CoreWeave. Just the two storage giants accounted for over 56% of the portfolio. A person with no prior asset management experience had concentrated his entire fortune on such a focused AI stake and added multiple leverage, so the crash came with no buffer. His heavy holdings like SanDisk and Bloom Energy were cut in half within a month, while shorted software stocks began to rebound, creating a deadlock where both longs and shorts lost money. By July 29, he couldn’t hold on any longer, negotiating overnight and selling most of his positions pre-market the next day at a 10% discount to Castle Investments. That moment coincided with the lowest point of this tech stock turmoil. Ken Griffin, who rarely writes to clients, broke the norm and sent a letter full of pride. He said Castle disposed of over 80% of the risk in the acquired portfolio through more than 100 block trades, involving a market value exceeding $4 billion across ten different stocks, marking the largest intraday block trade scale this year. In other words, the bloodied chips he bought at the bottom were mostly offloaded within weeks. From that low point, SanDisk rebounded by over 80% at its peak, and Micron rose more than 30%. Castle’s own flagship multi-strategy fund returned nearly 6% in July, its best month since 2022. Interestingly, this drama is connected to our crypto world by a thread. Recently, giants like Nvidia and Google competed with the crypto sector for the same batch of risk capital to grab computing power, with the AI narrative absorbing too much liquidity. Now that the strongest AI myth collapsed at the end of the month, many already have an answer in mind about where the money will flow next. The young man who was once idolized cut losses tearfully at the bottom; the truly seasoned hunter took the bloodied chips and flipped them immediately. Is this AI frenzy at halftime or the final act? What do you think?LayerZero, the leading full-chain protocol, has started cutting off support for fifteen chains A protocol that once told a $3 billion valuation story about connecting all blockchains quietly released an update this week that went unnoticed. In the announcement, LayerZero said that due to the extremely low activity on some chains, it will gradually stop providing off-chain support for fifteen chains over the next thirty days. These fifteen include EDU Chain, Meter, Shimmer, Cyber, Silicon, Sophon, Bitlayer, DFK Chain, Arbitrum Nova, DOS Chain, Cronos zkEVM, Degen, Skale Europa, Superposition, and Shrapnel. Many of these names might be unfamiliar, but they were all once part of that grand full-chain ecosystem map. Once support is withdrawn, LayerZero's DVN validators and Executor executors will no longer serve them, and some networks will also lose liquidity support from Stargate Hydra. Simply put, the originally promised free communication between any two chains now has a long list crossed out first. Interestingly, LayerZero has always packaged itself as the TCP/IP of the blockchain world, promoting universal connectivity and multi-chain coexistence. But when it comes to long-term operation and maintenance of these channels, the operator first uses activity as the metric to cut back. It's not that there are too many chains to handle, but that they can't sustain them. This starkly contrasts with the all-encompassing full-chain narrative from before. Behind this is actually a shift in the entire industry. A couple of years ago, the competition was about who had the bigger story and who added more chains; airdrop expectations and point activities could hype a chain in the short term. Now that the tide has receded, the competition is about which chains still have real transactions and real users supporting them. Those chains built on expectations lose their heat, and even the most basic cross-chain channels start to fail. What’s more worth pondering is that LayerZero only cited low activity as the reason but did not mention what will happen to the assets and users on these chains. Once off-chain support is withdrawn, ordinary users wanting to cross-chain transfer may have to take many detours or might not be able to do it at all. When a protocol that claims to connect everything starts picking and choosing chains to support, are the assets we hold on those niche public chains really safe? Could the next one to be cut off be a chain you never even imagined?A single listing roadmap doubled the price of a cat token with a market cap of 30 million by 2.7 times At 8:40 this morning, Coinbase released a very short announcement containing only one thing: adding BASECAT, DRB, POD, and GRASS to the asset listing roadmap. Note, it’s a roadmap, not a launch, not a trading start—just added to the to-do list. The announcement also included a sentence saying whether these assets can really start trading depends on market-making support and technical infrastructure being in place; only when conditions are met will there be further notice. But the market didn’t wait for those conditions to be met. BASECAT surged over 270% in 24 hours, pushing its market cap to 32 million USD. DRB rose over 70%, market cap 14 million. POD increased 28%, market cap 235 million. GRASS went up 7%, market cap 82 million. All four names appeared in the same announcement, but the gains differ by nearly forty times. When you compare market cap and gains side by side, the pattern is glaring: the smaller the market cap, the more violent the rise; the largest market caps barely moved. This shows that today’s buyers aren’t buying the projects themselves, but how scarce the tokens are. According to the timeline in the announcement, BASECAT and DRB are expected to start trading on August 24, while POD and GRASS are scheduled for later this week. No real trading has happened yet, but the market has already run through a full cycle. This is an old script played over and over. A major exchange puts a token’s name on the candidate list, and the secondary market immediately prices in the expectation. By the official launch day, those who knew the news earliest have already accumulated enough tokens. Historically, many listing announcements result in the opening price being the best price during that period, then gradually declining afterward. There’s another detail I find interesting. Among these four, the top gainer is a cat token on-chain with a market cap of 30 million USD. If you want to seriously study its fundamentals, you might not find enough material. Meanwhile, GRASS, which already has a market cap over 80 million and actual business, rose the least. I’m not judging which is more valuable, just that this situation clearly reflects the current market state. Money isn’t lacking, patience is. Bitcoin just crossed 77,000, the fear and greed index is in the greed zone, and funds are everywhere looking for catalysts that can materialize in the short term. A listing roadmap perfectly combines three things: the endorsement of an exchange, a clear date, and a sufficiently small market cap. So the real key point is August 24. On the day BASECAT officially lists, who will be on the buy side? Those who chased the 270% gain today are waiting for a higher price, or are they waiting to offload their tokens during the opening liquidity wave? Have you ever fallen into this trap—rushing in as soon as the announcement comes out, only to get stuck at the highest point on the launch day? Do you think a roadmap is worth this price, or is it just a wave of sentiment?Veteran market maker moves 1,140 BTC into Binance Just after 9 AM this morning, on-chain monitoring suddenly released a message. Jump Crypto transferred 1,140 BTC to Binance within half an hour, which, at the price at that time, was about 88.98 million USD. This is not a small amount; nearly ninety million dollars worth of coins quietly flowed into the exchange's wallet. Those familiar with the space know what Jump Crypto is. It is one of the oldest market makers in the crypto market, holding massive liquidity and trading channels. Its every move often impacts the market more than ordinary large holders. Transferring coins into a centralized exchange usually makes on-chain analysts first think it might be for selling. Interestingly, the timing of this event is very delicate. Just this week, Bitcoin surged past 79,000 USD, hitting a new high in recent months, and the whole community was celebrating a bull run. This rebound is listed by many data sources as one of the strongest weekly gains since 2023. A few days ago, data showed BlackRock bought over ten thousand BTC in two days, with institutional funds visibly entering the market. Even indicators tracking bottom-fishing sentiment have exited the bottom zone, indicating that this rally has mostly absorbed cheap chips. Yet, at this critical moment, a top market maker chose to move nearly ninety million dollars worth of coins to an exchange. On one hand, institutions are loudly increasing positions; on the other, a veteran player is moving coins toward the exit. This contrast invites speculation. Is someone thinking the price has risen enough and wants to lock in profits? Or does Jump anticipate a big fluctuation ahead and is moving ammunition to the exchange for quick action? This institution has a polarizing reputation in the community, being both a key liquidity provider and often involved in controversies. Its several key historical moves have coincided with market turning points. Of course, moving coins into an exchange does not necessarily mean dumping. Market makers need to place coins on platforms to provide liquidity; it could also be portfolio adjustment or hedging for clients. On-chain data can only tell us where the money went, not why. In the coming days, whether these coins stay on Binance or quickly enter trading pairs will be closely watched by everyone. But the market never lacks imagination. When Bitcoin stands at a high level and retail investors get excited, every large transfer to exchanges is magnified as a signal of someone fleeing. Whether today's 1,140 BTC is Jump cashing out profits or just moving coins from a cold wallet to another location, probably only they know. What do you think? Is this nearly ninety million a prelude to retreat or just a false alarm? Why ZEC's surge of over 40% quietly hit a new all-time high That K-line in the early morning stunned many. ZEC, a privacy coin repeatedly declared obsolete over the years, surged past $768 in just a few hours, with a 24-hour increase reaching 31%. It then touched around $805, rising more than 40% in a single day, directly breaking its historical highest price. For an old coin often said to suffer from liquidity drought, this kind of rally doesn't look like a casual retail sweep. Zcash is not an air coin. It was born in 2016, founded by Zooko Wilcox, who built it on zk-SNARKs zero-knowledge proof technology. Early on, it was hailed as Bitcoin's most serious competitor. It can hide both transfer amounts and addresses, a capability that has become rare in an increasingly transparent on-chain era. But it is precisely this privacy that made it a thorn in the regulators' side. Interestingly, in the past two years, discussions about privacy coins have mostly been avoided. Regulatory crackdowns came one after another, mainstream exchanges gradually delisted Monero and Zcash’s privacy versions, and on-chain tracking technology matured. Everyone thought these assets were doomed. Yet it exploded when confidence was lowest, and not as a small coin with a few million in liquidity, but with real money pushing it up cleanly, as if someone had set the stage in advance. What's fascinating is that the more people enter, the more afraid they are of being seen. Institutions put Bitcoin on their financial reports, treasury companies show their holdings publicly—every transaction is exposed to the light. At this time, an asset that can hide its origins makes veteran players excited. This ZEC rally might be driven not by technology, but by a long-lost sense of mystery. Looking back two days ago, the Winklevoss brothers just dropped $33.33 million to acquire 18% of Zcash’s total network hash rate, effectively putting half a foot into the privacy coin mining table. Many laughed it off as a rich person’s sentimental spending. Now looking back, the price started to rise shortly after that investment. Coincidence, or did someone smell the trend early? No one outside can say for sure. Even more intriguing are the institutional moves. Grayscale is still increasing LINK holdings; the traditional finance line hasn’t withdrawn. But the main drivers of this ZEC surge are clearly not institutions, but rather the long-dormant old money and retail investors waking up simultaneously. Recently, US regulators have softened their stance on crypto, compliance frameworks are gradually clarifying, and the heavy burden on privacy coins seems to be lifting. Of course, some are skeptical. ZEC’s circulating supply isn’t large, so it’s easy to pump. Once shorts get squeezed, the price runs up by itself. Plus, few have been watching it closely these past two years, with chips concentrated in a few hands. One big bullish candle can ignite the whole market. In other words, a sharp rise doesn’t necessarily mean strong fundamentals. I’m quite curious how far this wave can go. A privacy coin that’s been written off for two years—has it really found a new funding logic, or is this just an emotional outburst fueled by liquidity overflow? What do you think? Can this ZEC frenzy hold up?ZEC, which no one cares about, quietly hit a new all-time high I was surprised when checking the market today. The group chat has been all about where BTC is from morning till now, and no one mentioned ZEC. Yet this thing is already at $768, up 31% in 24 hours, directly hitting a new all-time high. It reached this new high silently. ZEC is Zcash, originally positioned as Bitcoin's privacy version, focusing on anonymous transfers where transaction records are hidden. Over the years, it has been barely alive, with less discussion than newly issued small meme coins, slow on-chain development, and many people have long forgotten about it. So this sudden 31% surge to a new all-time high made me first check if there was any big news. After looking around, the official side released no announcements, and the market has no unified explanation; it just simply rose. This kind of silent surge is the most unsettling. A rise without news support either means funds have been pre-positioned waiting for follow-up benefits, or it's an emotional pulse that will fade after the pump. The privacy coin sector has been suppressed by regulations over the years, with anti-money laundering crackdowns everywhere, and the anonymous transfer narrative has never held up. By the way, ZEC has suffered a lot these years: top exchanges have delisted its trading pairs, mixing services have been repeatedly shut down, and the entire privacy track has been hit hard. For it to squeeze out a new all-time high in such an environment is quite counterintuitive. But if one day regulations loosen or new adoption scenarios emerge, this sector has huge elasticity since most tokens are held by old hands, so selling pressure isn't that fierce. From an operational perspective, chasing highs at this level is the biggest taboo. $768 is a new all-time high with no trapped positions above for reference; the rise has no ceiling, and the fall has no support reference, so volatility will be especially intense. Contract traders entering must keep leverage as low as possible, or a single spike could trigger a chain of liquidations. Those looking to play this move would be better off waiting for a pullback to see if the previous breakout level holds; if it holds, then consider next steps; if not, just watch the show. In the short term, this looks emotion-driven; in the long term, it comes back to the old question: does privacy coin have a future? If it's just hype, then this move is no different from previous pump-and-dump altcoins. If the narrative is truly restarting, then today's new high might just be a starting point, depending on whether real developments follow. What I'm curious about now is who is buying and why. Until that answer comes out, I tend to just observe and not act. What do you think? Is this ZEC move a real start or just a pulse? For those already on board, do you dare to hold overnight? BTC surges to 80,000, mining company IPO raises only 30 million Let's start with two sets of numbers. BlackRock bought 11,000 BTC and 130,000 ETH in the past two days, equivalent to 852 million USD plus 316 million USD, totaling over 1.1 billion USD spent in two days. On the other hand, a Texas-based Bitcoin mining company called Bitari just filed for an IPO with the US SEC on August 21, aiming for Nasdaq under the ticker BIAI, issuing 4.285 million shares at 7 USD each, hoping to raise 30 million USD, with about 27 million USD net after underwriting fees. The IPO fundraising amount of one mining company is not even enough for BlackRock's buying volume in one morning. This comparison is quite interesting when viewed together. Bitari's current assets are as follows: a 20 MW mining farm operating in Wheeler, Texas; a 20 MW farm under construction in Dumas; and a signed contract for another in Marion, Indiana. The total scale is about 60 MW, which is considered small but fine in the mining circle, completely different in scale from the gigawatt-level mining giants. There are several points worth pondering about this IPO. One is timing: Bitcoin just experienced a violent rally, with ETF net inflows of 1.6 billion USD in a single week, and market sentiment is hot. Filing now means valuation expectations might be more favorable. Another is the amount: 30 million USD is really not large for a mining company; many mining companies raise more than this in a single private round, indicating Bitari is clear-headed, taking small steps quickly, first opening the door to capitalization, then gradually increasing investment later. For the crypto community, the mining company IPO itself carries more signaling significance than the amount. In recent years, mining stocks have gained increasing presence in traditional markets. Crypto concept stocks like MSTR and COIN are already linked with BTC, and now mining infrastructure is a new face. More mining companies going public means Bitcoin holders are becoming more institutionalized, which is a positive factor for the long-term narrative. But in the short term, whether IPO fundraising drains liquidity or brings fresh capital depends on secondary market performance after listing. If the 7 USD pricing breaks below at listing, the sentiment of the entire mining stock sector will be affected. From a trading perspective, this kind of news has no direct short-term impact on the coin price; its real reference value lies in sentiment. Strong performance of BTC concept stocks will in turn support bullish sentiment in the crypto space. The charts of MSTR and COIN can be seen as leading indicators of Bitcoin sentiment; they move first, and the crypto market often follows. What I'm curious about is whether a 30 million USD IPO at this scale is a smart small-step approach, or if mining financing is actually not as hot as it appears on the surface? What do you think? This video discusses the latest article published on August 21 by Ray Dalio, founder of Bridgewater Associates. I'll summarize the core points for you and then share my views. --- **What exactly did Dalio say?** Three sets of hard data: 1. The U.S. federal government debt just surpassed $40 trillion, with annual revenue around $5.5 trillion and annual spending about $7.5 trillion, resulting in a $2 trillion deficit per year. Interest payments alone cost $1 trillion, accounting for 20% of revenue; plus about $10 trillion in bonds will mature and need principal repayment. 2. The 30-year U.S. Treasury yield surged to 5.34%, the highest since 2007. Japan is selling U.S. Treasuries to support the yen, and Finance Minister Suzuki was forced to announce an expansion of long-term bond buybacks (single purchase increased from $2 billion to over $4 billion), but the market only rebounded for less than 24 hours before continuing to fall. 3. His judgment: if no course correction occurs, the debt crisis will "break out in about three years, with a two-year margin of error"—earliest in 1 year, latest in 5 years. Two possible outcomes: either interest rates continue to soar and drag down the economy, or the Federal Reserve prints money to buy bonds, causing dollar depreciation and inflation. He advises underweighting bonds. **First, Dalio has been sounding the "wolf is coming" alarm for many years.** He has been warning since at least 2018 when he published "The Debt Crisis," first saying "about three years" in March 2025, and now repeating it in August. Debt problems are chronic, not an acute heart attack. Chronic issues can drag on, especially since the U.S. has the "painkiller" of dollar hegemony. Some commenters joked, "This guy has been warning for years," which is true. **Second, the "about three years, plus or minus two years" window is too broad.** One to five years offers almost no guidance for investment decisions. If you liquidate all U.S. stocks and go all-in on gold tomorrow because of this, but the crisis only happens in 2030, you will miss five years of gains. **Third, politicians won’t just sit and watch.** Dalio himself said the solution is a three-pronged approach: "cut spending + raise taxes + lower interest rates," reducing the deficit from 6% of GDP to 3%. Although politically very difficult, it’s not impossible. When the crisis nears, bipartisan compromise is more likely than you think—after all, no one wants a disaster during their term. --- **Practical impact on your holdings:** **In crypto, this is a long-term positive but not a short-term buy signal.** Dalio explicitly said "allocate a small amount to Bitcoin," which is another endorsement from Wall Street institutions of BTC as "digital gold." BTC’s surge to $80,000 on Friday is directly related to this news. But since you already hold BTC/ETH/SOL spot and have short contracts waiting for a pullback, this pace is right—don’t chase highs just because of his words. BTC’s long-term logic is stronger, but short-term RSI is still in overbought territory; wait for a pullback. **In U.S. stocks, there’s an added reason for caution but not to liquidate.** Dalio’s warning plus the 30-year yield at 5.34% indeed suppresses overvalued tech stocks. This confirms what was said before—wait for Nvidia’s earnings on August 27 and the Jackson Hole meeting before making moves. The U.S. debt issue is a sword hanging over the stock market, but no one knows when it will fall. You don’t need to run now, but don’t rush to bottom-fish either. **In gold, you can pay attention but you already have XAU in your portfolio.** Dalio suggests 10%-15% allocation to gold; gold surged to 4600 on Friday. Chasing highs short-term isn’t wise; consider adding some on a pullback, but your main battlefield is crypto. A 5%-10% hedge position in gold is enough; no need to copy his ratio exactly. **Your wife’s BTC contract, with a cost under $60,000 and 3x leverage, is actually supported by this news.** Dalio’s logic is about long-term dollar depreciation; BTC as a non-government-issued hard asset will benefit. Her liquidation price is around $40,000, with enough safety margin. Just set a trailing stop at $65,000 and leave it alone. --- **In summary:** Dalio’s direction is correct; the U.S. debt problem is a real gray rhino, but the time window is too wide to base your immediate actions on. For you, wait for pullbacks, hold your spot positions, and don’t disrupt your rhythm because of a crisis that "might happen within 1 to 5 years." The real warning signs to watch for are: consecutive failed U.S. debt auctions, a sharp drop in the dollar index, and the Fed being forced to restart quantitative easing—only then should you make major portfolio adjustments.Trillions in U.S. debt weighing on Trump, yet he says growth will solve it Yesterday, there was still talk in the group that Bassett led people to buy bonds, suppressing long-term yields, so both the U.S. stock market and BTC surged together. Today, Trump directly denied it, saying it’s not true, I didn’t instruct anyone to intervene in the bond market, to solve the U.S. debt problem, growth alone is enough. This sounds easy, but the numbers are not. The U.S. national debt has already exceeded 40 trillion dollars, which breaks down to about $120,000 per American. To solve this scale of debt through growth means the U.S. economy must maintain high growth over the long term to gradually reduce the debt-to-GDP ratio, which is visibly difficult. Trump added an even harsher comment: when asked if he would discuss further intervention with Bassett after U.S. debt yields rose, he said the ultimate intervention tool is our military. This statement immediately sparked market speculation—whether it’s just bluster or if there’s really a trump card, the vague stance invites more conjecture. Looking back at the recent market interactions, Dalio just warned about U.S. debt crisis risks and urged everyone to allocate to gold; Goldman Sachs said demand for gold call options surged, and gold prices have already surpassed $4600. Now Trump has dismissed some intervention expectations, effectively telling the market that government backstopping is not a given. The logic chain here is: if long-term bond yields rise again, valuation pressure on risk assets will increase, so U.S. stocks and BTC will face short-term pressure; but conversely, if the market believes the debt is unsolvable, safe-haven funds will accelerate into gold and BTC, since these two assets owe no one money. Yesterday, the three major U.S. stock indices all closed higher, with gold and BTC also rising. This kind of dual bull market in stocks and bonds combined with safe-haven demand shows the market is betting on both sides. Now that the official stance is out, the real weight lies in the September Fed meeting and the upcoming long-term bond auctions. Auction results are more concrete than talk—high subscription multiples mean market acceptance, no subscriptions mean trouble. From a swing trading perspective, during this macro window, don’t bet on a single direction; both long and short logics have support. Wait for data to come in before choosing a direction. Long-term investors can be calmer; the debt problem is unsolvable in the short term, which actually supports the long-term narrative for assets like BTC and gold. Do you think this 40 trillion U.S. debt bomb can be defused by growth alone? Or will everyone eventually have to hide in gold and BTC?The whale who held on for four months has chosen to take profits and exit Another intriguing on-chain move appeared in the early morning. A position that has been long since April this year, accumulating 120,000 ETH, chose for the first time after four months to take profits, cashing out about $9.4 million. This person is not the type to chase highs and sell lows as a short-term trader. What does 120,000 ETH mean? At the current price of around 2,500, this position’s total scale is about $3 billion, a player who truly put their net worth on the line. Ethereum hasn’t had an easy time over the past four months, falling steadily from spring and then consolidating for a long time. Many couldn’t withstand the panic and cut losses, but he held on without a twitch. On-chain data shows this long position has barely moved since it was opened, even surviving the harshest spikes. The contrast lies exactly here. Just in the past two days, the market has rebounded, Ethereum has climbed back above 2,500, spot ETFs have seen several days of net inflows, institutions are adding positions against the trend, and all the groups are full of cheers for the bull market’s return. Yet, this veteran long holder who endured the toughest phase quietly unloaded part of his chips at the peak of the rally. We tend to interpret taking profits as bearish. But for long-term holders, holding through the drop and selling when it rises is a discipline. Four months ago, no one knew where the bottom was when he opened the position. Now that the price has returned, he takes some profits off the table and leaves the rest floating. This is not fleeing but rather converting months of hardship into real dollars. What’s more worth pondering is another layer. Bitcoin has surged past 79,000, Ethereum has recovered, many altcoins have broadly risen, and the greed index has jumped from fear to greed. But the more excited the whole market is, the more we should ask: those who shouted “hold long-term” at the end of last year, are they adding positions now or quietly reducing them? This whale answered with action: he didn’t run at the bottom but chose to take profits first during the celebration. This rhythm doesn’t necessarily mean a top, but at least it shows the most steadfast group has started converting paper wealth into spendable money. Do you think this rebound can go further, or is the fact that the veteran long holder is taking profits itself a signal to be cautious? The owner of a failed bank turns around to snatch the stablecoin market At first glance, isn't this just another stablecoin? But Shei's plan is different; he wants to prove that banks can also use blockchain to create a payment system similar to stablecoins, while holding onto the traditional financial advantage of US dollar credit. Simply put, this is a direct counterattack by the banking system against the expansion of stablecoins. The most ironic part is this: Shei's previous employer was Signature Bank, which was directly shut down by regulators during the 2023 banking crisis because it deeply served crypto clients and became a target. A person coming out of a failed bank now turns around to use the crypto world's most basic public chain technology to create a dollar—this scene is somewhat absurd. Even more interesting is that their reserve logic is almost identical. NDD claims to be backed one-to-one by cash and short-term US Treasuries, which is essentially no different from the reserve structure of mainstream stablecoins today. The only difference is whose name the US dollar credit brand is under. Shei repeatedly emphasizes maintaining the US dollar credit advantage, which, frankly, is to tell the market that on-chain dollars are more reassuring when held by regulated banks rather than by a few issuers. Stablecoins have indeed taken the banks' market share in recent years. On-chain settlements are fast and cheap, and more and more businesses and individuals are moving their dollars into these on-chain dollars. The banking system's deposits are visibly being siphoned off. Ordinary bank dollar transfers get stuck on weekends and holidays, but versions like NDD running on public chains never close, which is a real attraction for corporate treasury management. Shei's move is essentially making it clear on behalf of traditional banking: we can use your underlying infrastructure, but the US dollar credit brand still belongs to us. NDD is still a new project and far from truly threatening the scale of these stablecoins. But the signal it sends is worth pondering: as banks start actively learning to use public chains, the boundary between stablecoins and bank deposits is becoming blurred. On one side, crypto-native stablecoins are desperately trying to gain regulatory compliance; on the other, banks are desperately trying to reclaim on-chain capabilities. This tug-of-war over the US dollar's narrative power is just beginning. What do you think? Can banks really reclaim the stablecoin market with this counterattack? Sold ETH at 1738 and bought it back at 2100 Jiang Zhuoer, founder of the Litecoin mining pool, admitted his mistake today, saying that his previous bearish market judgment was wrong. He now has 90% confidence that the bear market is over and believes this round of ETH will be the main driver of the bull market, potentially outperforming BTC. To understand the weight of this statement, you have to look at how he handled that batch of ETH. He previously sold ETH between $1738 and $1931 when the market was still in a downtrend and bearish sentiment was strong. That move seemed reasonable. However, instead of falling, the price rose steadily, and he had to stop loss and buy back at $2100. This round trip cost him about 20% more than his original position. But that’s not all. When ETH rose to $2525, he sold 50% of his spot holdings to test if he could catch the top, with a stop loss set at $2550. It’s like his mind was still bearish, but his body had already bought back at $2100. He said he was bearish, but his actions were more honest than his words. He summarized that the most important thing in trading is not predicting the market but execution and risk control: hold when right, stop loss when wrong. Coming from someone who just missed a round, this sounds a bit ironic but is actually very true. He executed the stop loss buyback decisively, didn’t stubbornly hold on, and didn’t get angry and quit just because he sold too early. He admitted his mistake and got back in when needed, which is a form of discipline. Having been in the crypto space for nearly ten years, publicly reviewing a losing trade is something worth learning from. He also has a plan for the funds he missed out on: if BTC falls back to the $67,000 to $72,000 range, he will buy in fully; otherwise, he will buy at the current price by the end of October at the latest. This is his personal plan, and we can just listen. The market won’t follow anyone’s plan, but the fact that he dares to specify exact levels shows he truly believes it, not just talking. For those watching the market daily, the most interesting thing here is not whether he is bullish or bearish, but that market sentiment is shifting. Some of the most staunch bears are publicly admitting mistakes, and they are doing so by stop loss buybacks with real money, which has been rare in the past six months. Previously, traders publicly closed all short positions, and now mining pool leaders admit they were wrong. The bear camp is visibly shrinking. ETH is now above $2500, and contract positions are rising. There may be a battle between bulls and bears near his $2550 stop loss level, likely amplifying short-term volatility. Those with heavy positions should be cautious. Would you trust someone who shouted to sell their position and then turned around to call for buying? Discuss in the comments.Canaan surged 25% overnight as crypto stocks collectively celebrated Last night when the US stock market opened, the crypto sector's tone changed dramatically. Mining machine manufacturer Canaan's stock price rose over 25%, MARA nearly 16%, even treasury company Strive rose more than 16%, Coinbase surged over 7%, Circle rose over 9%. HOOD, that is Robinhood, was even stronger, soaring 11.69% in a single day, with its stock price standing above $106. Opening the market software, the screen was full of red, all crypto-related, echoing BTC's rise above $79,000 in the crypto circle. The trigger for this wave of celebration is clear: after the coin price surged, funds began flowing into crypto-related stocks. Trump stated that the US government might purchase Bitcoin on a large scale in the future and again called on Congress to advance the CLARITY Act, which immediately ignited sentiment. The difference from previous rounds is that the narrative shifted from speculating on coins to speculating on national reserves. The story's ceiling was replaced, and the market's valuation logic for mining and treasury companies changed from mining cash flow to the concept of national strategic reserves, with a completely different imagination. The capital side is also cooperating. In the past two days, Circle and Tether have minted a total of $3 billion worth of stablecoins, equivalent to injecting $3 billion of real ammunition into the market. Liquidity comes in, and the first to react are these high-beta crypto stocks, which rise quickly and fall sharply as well. There is a detail worth pondering here. When Trump said buying Bitcoin, he meant the US government buying, not encouraging retail investors to rush in. If the US truly includes Bitcoin as a reserve asset, the first beneficiaries would indeed be mining and treasury companies holding coins. Of course, from statement to implementation is still a long way off; the bill must go through procedures, and the reserve plan must also go through procedures. The money from news comes fast and goes fast; today’s hype is about expectations, and if expectations change tomorrow, the pullback will be sharp. Looking deeper, the rise of crypto stocks and coin prices feed each other. When coin prices rise, the coins on treasury companies' books become valuable, and stock prices follow; when stock prices rise, companies can pledge stocks to raise more money, then buy more coins. This cycle has appeared in previous bull markets, but the problem is that in the latter half of each cycle, leverage and bubbles also expand. Yesterday, Castle Securities offloaded 80% of the risk in the acquired fund portfolio through more than 100 block trades. Such top institutions busy reducing risk on a day of celebration, while retail investors are busy adding positions, makes for an interesting picture—who is swimming naked will be revealed in earnings season. For us, the rise and fall of crypto stocks is an emotional thermometer. When coin and stock linkage is obvious, it means real money is participating, not just internal market fighting. But also note, US stock volatility is more influenced by macro policies, so watch both coins and stocks together, not just one side. Regarding this wave of mining stock celebration, do you think it’s a prelude to a bull market or an emotional bubble? HYPE just hit a new all-time high, and the $800 million unlock is coming Let's start with the countdown. At 7 AM on August 29, Beijing time, about 9.92 million HYPE tokens will be unlocked, which at the current price is worth approximately $800 million. Today is August 22, so there are less than 7 days left until that gate opens. Right at this moment, HYPE just reached a new all-time high. The intraday peak today hit $81.7, and it is still above $80, up more than 7.79% on the day. The price is at its most euphoric level, and a massive unlock is on the way. The timing is somewhat delicate. First, let's talk about who HYPE is. It is the platform token of Hyperliquid, which is currently the top player in on-chain derivatives trading. Previously, its open interest once surged to $12.5 billion, a scale that ranks it among the top in the entire crypto space. The platform token's price is tightly linked to on-chain trading volume. This round, HYPE has risen from a low point to above $80, driven by a recovery in derivatives market sentiment and continuous capital inflows into this ecosystem. The market is pricing it so high betting that the on-chain derivatives sector will continue to grow. The unlock event is a different matter. 9.92 million tokens will flow into the market, whether from the team, investors, or the ecosystem treasury, which will increase selling pressure in the short term. Historically, many projects have seen prices pumped to the sky before unlocks, only to crash on the unlock day; others have withstood the unlock and continued upward. The difference mainly depends on whether the buying power is strong enough. HYPE has a special feature: its burn mechanism has been continuously operating, with over 47 million tokens burned so far, maintaining scarcity logic. On August 26, a USDC reserve income sharing mechanism will also launch, expected to bring about $200 million in annual buyback power. This is what sets it apart from projects that just dump after unlocks; its long-term value logic remains intact. For traders, these 7 days are a clear game. Bulls want to pump before the unlock to sell high, while bears focus on the post-unlock selling pressure. Both sides' expectations clash, likely amplifying volatility and causing frequent swings. If you hold a position, first decide which side you are on to avoid getting hit from both ends. From a long-term perspective, the platform token's value anchor is still the real on-chain trading volume. The unlock is just a temporary supply shock. Whether it holds or not will lead to two different scenarios, and the strength of the buying power will be clear then. With a new all-time high coinciding with the $800 million unlock countdown, are you ready to exit early or bet it will survive this test? 15 chains are being abandoned, users need to redeem their assets quickly LayerZero issued a notice today that over the next 30 days, it will gradually stop off-chain support for 15 low-activity chains. In plain language, it means they are no longer supporting these chains, and related cross-chain services will be withdrawn. Here is the list: EDU Chain, Meter, Shimmer, Cyber, Silicon, Sophon, Bitlayer, DFK Chain, Arbitrum Nova, DOS Chain, Cronos zkEVM, Degen, Skale Europa, Superposition, Shrapnel. The reason for these 15 chains is simple: their activity is too low, and continuing maintenance is not cost-effective. The shutdown is not just nominal support. LayerZero's DVN and Executor services will no longer cover these networks, and some networks will even lose support from Stargate Hydra. To clarify, DVN is the cross-chain message verification network, acting like a security inspector for bridges, responsible for confirming that messages truly come from the other chain; Executor is the execution layer, responsible for executing messages on the target chain. Once these two layers are withdrawn, cross-chain assets trying to exit these chains will be cut off, leaving only a narrow path with no maintenance. The official reminder is that users should redeem Hydra assets such as USDC.e, wETH, and Hydra USDT from the relevant networks as soon as possible. These are wrapped tokens that came cross-chain, and once the bridge is cut off, converting them back to native assets will be difficult. There is a particularly noteworthy point here. Back when cross-chain narratives were hottest, middleware like LayerZero was eager to onboard new chains; each new chain was a story of ecosystem expansion, with rounds of funding and grand promises. Now, with the market turning, low-activity chains are being abandoned in batches. The contrast between the expansion phase's promises and the contraction phase's reality is quite stark. This also shows that the business model of cross-chain middleware essentially profits from economies of scale: the more chains, the better; when a chain becomes inactive, maintenance costs become a pure burden, and cutting chains is inevitable. For ordinary people, the biggest lesson is: the liquidity of cross-chain assets has never truly been their own; it is provided by others. Once middleware withdraws, assets may get stuck on the chain, and calls for help will go unanswered. Check your wallet now for assets on these chains, and redeem them while the bridges are still intact. Don't wait until it's truly impossible to retrieve them and regret it. By the way, such notices are often not the last; cutting low-activity chains will become routine for cross-chain projects. People holding assets on small chains should make checking chain assets a regular habit, just like backing up your wallet. Back then, they were eager to onboard; now they are blacklisting in batches. The cross-chain boom is fading faster than expected. Do you still have assets on these chains?Bankers want to change two words, and the entire bill might be lost Less than four weeks remain until the U.S. Senate's debate and vote on the Clarity Act on September 15. At this time, the American Bankers Association has submitted two amendment proposals that look like mere wording tweaks but are actually chiseling holes in the bill's load-bearing walls. One is to replace the existing standard with something substantially similar to interest, and the other is even more severe, simply requiring the deletion of one English word, "solely," which in Chinese means "only." Summer Mersinger, CEO of the Blockchain Association of America, directly called it out. She said this is not a simple wording adjustment but a major policy change. The "substantially similar to interest" standard is a highly flexible legal standard; once written in, regulators can interpret it however they want, with boundaries relying entirely on discretion. Deleting "solely" directly changes the scope of stablecoin yield restrictions in the GENIUS Act. The line painstakingly drawn by Congress before would become blurred with the loss of just one word. She put it more bluntly as a matter of time. These provisions have been negotiated for months, with all parties barely reaching a balance. Reopening negotiations now is not to improve the bill but to restart a process that fundamentally cannot be completed. Four weeks is not enough time. If it can't be finished, it fails. So why are the banks in such a hurry? The public reason is concern that stablecoins will drain bank deposits. That sounds reasonable; we've been hearing this claim every day for the past two years. But the numbers don't support this. Mersinger's data shows that after the GENIUS Act passed, U.S. bank deposits grew for three consecutive quarters, increasing by over $800 billion. Deposits didn't run away; they actually increased by $800 billion. This is the most interesting part of the matter. The side shouting about losing blood is actually seeing their account balances rise; the ones truly stuck are crypto platforms that want to comply but can't find the door. What the Clarity Act aims to do is quite practical: clearly delineate the jurisdictions of the SEC and CFTC, require platforms serving U.S. users to register and file, and mandate customer asset segregation, information disclosure, and conflict of interest management. We all know who these provisions are really protecting. Delays themselves also have costs. As long as the rules aren't finalized, platforms can't give users clear answers, and when problems arise, everyone keeps passing the buck. Most of the losses suffered in the past two years have grown out of this gray area. In the same week, the SEC just proposed a draft framework for crypto asset rules, allowing some financing to be exempt from full securities registration within limits, and leaving conditional safe harbors for some token projects. CFTC Chairman Selig also warned that if Congress continues to delay, he will use existing authority to set rules himself. Washington is clearly shifting from enforcement to rulemaking; the direction has already turned. So the real suspense now isn't about the bill's overall direction but about those two words. One is a flexible standard, the other an adverb. Whether they can be stopped will determine if this regulatory window lands on September 15 or gets pushed back to the end of the line again. Do you think that "solely" will ultimately be preserved?

Orbit Topic Sitemap