Orbit Post Sitemap
$SPACE's stock price has already fallen below its issue price. The current price of $115 seems like a bargain only because the previous issue price was $135, but that $135 valuation lacked actual performance support at the time.
The Barron's analysis team pointed out that the stock has nearly halved from its peak and is one of the worst-performing IPOs since 2019. The key risk lies in this trillion-dollar market cap company being valued at 40 to 50 times sales, a premium that is extremely rare. Valuation multiples essentially represent discounted future earnings, and the discount rate is controlled by the Federal Reserve. Even if the company's performance remains unchanged, interest rate changes could cut the valuation in half.
Additionally, insiders still have a 181-day lock-up period. After the lock-up expires, a large volume of early profits may flood the market, creating significant selling pressure. The current stock price is only a phase price within the lock-up period. Early in its listing, it was a popular buy among retail investors, but everyone should be cautious about blindly bottom-fishing.
If you currently think $115 is cheap, you must carefully consider whether this judgment is based on the company's real profitability or anchored by the previous high price.When discussing MEMES, you can't avoid the veteran player $DOGE. Many newcomers trading DOGE spend their days glued to Musk's Twitter, thinking a single post could trigger a major bull market. Today, combined with current market trends, I'll explain this classic meme coin in detail. Let's start with the underlying background: DOGE was originally a joke coin born in 2013, originally created by programmers to poke fun at Bitcoin. No one expected it to unexpectedly become a global sensation. It is considered the pioneer of the entire crypto meme track. Its credentials are clear, and almost every veteran player has heard of it, with deep public consensus. Later, Musk's continued public endorsement pushed DOGE's popularity to its peak, creating an epic surge that year. It was from that moment that the market formed a fixed impression: DOGE rally = Musk's dynamic. Considering the current market situation: Recently, the MEME sector has collectively rebounded, and DOGE has followed market sentiment with several rounds of surges. But the problem is obvious: each rally lacks momentum, and after a rally, it quickly starts oscillating with a bearish decline, making it difficult to form a consistent trend. Many people wonder: among leading Memes, PEPE and SHIB occasionally rebound, why is DOGE always fleeting? The core root lies in the token mechanism. In-depth analysis of the core logic of the market: DOGE's most fatal flaw: no total supply cap, continuous new issuance every year, no deflationary expectations. SHIB has a burn plan, the PEPE community continues to drive the deflationary narrative, and DOGE has been continuously adding new circulating tokens over the long termThe false proposition and true solution of Bitcoin DeFi: Why I reconsider OKX's WB3
$600 billion worth of Bitcoin is lying on the chain and sleeping. DeFi has been calling for BTC to enter the market for so many years, but only a handful of solutions have come up. Existing bridging products either hand private keys to multi-signature committees or rely on a complex set of trust assumptions. OKX's WB3 has taken a completely different path, with underlying logic hitting the sector's pain points.
The mainstream BTC cross-chain solutions on the market essentially turn Bitcoin into a packaged asset. WBTC is hosted by BitGo, and various cross-chain bridges are backed by validator pools. The design idea of OKX WB3 is the opposite: BTC does not need to leave the Bitcoin chain; users lock assets through self-custody vaults, and contract states on external chains are transmitted from zero-knowledge proofs back to the Bitcoin network for verification, compressing trust assumptions down to the cryptographic level.
What really made me pause and take a closer look was the engineering implementation of WB3. Existing ZK solutions often mean extremely high gas overhead for verification on the Bitcoin chain, but OKX has optimized proof structures to reduce on-chain burden to an acceptable range. Of course, the interaction threshold for this system is not low; ordinary users need to understand UTXO-level script design, and the learning curve is quite steep. $BABY The ecosystem currently needs to reduce the complexity of front-end interactions.
From a capital efficiency perspective, the overlay design of TBV and Babylon staking protocols is quite interesting. Staked BTC can be directly used as DeFi collateral without needing to be unstaked and re-deposited. Compared to competitors, most staking schemes lock up assets and then passively wait for returns, whereas OX seeks a better balance between security and liquidity. WB3 is still in the early validation stage, and its ecosystem richness is far behind that of mature protocols on Ethereum. But at least it proves one thing: Bitcoin's DeFi adoption does not come at the expense of self-custody. If this direction succeeds, BABY will capture not just the staking narrative, but the entire infrastructure value of BTC's native financial layer. OKX stands at the right starting point. #OKX.ai: One person is a world-class company #交易之声: Your experience deserves to be heard $BTC $ETH Breaking news: The U.S. Senate is highly likely to vote on the CLARITY crypto bill next week, with Trump clearly stating that the bill will be signed immediately after being sent to the White House.
The probability of implementation within 2026 has risen sharply to 38%. Once the bill officially takes effect, it will attract massive institutional capital inflow, becoming a historic positive for Bitcoin and the entire crypto market. Investors looking forward to a new bull market will pay close attention to this. #参议院CLARITY法案下周或表决: Will it be a positive outlook or a premature failure? Now, let's talk about trading: who exactly smashed $DEXE?
I did $DEX multiple times, basically losing many times, but finally made a big profit, totaling $60,000.
After closing my position and pocketing profits, I started thinking about why the project team would do this.
The article mentioned that due to the mirro mechanism, the market was sold off first, and then news was released on-chain.
I wanted to figure out every trade, so I dug into it and came to the following conclusion:
Most likely, DWF was premeditated in dumping the market, and the market maker for DEXE is not DWF.
The reasons are as follows:
1. Using ARKM, the number of entities with the largest decrease in DEXE holdings is CEFFU. A penetration shows that on July 22, Ceffu → Binance Deposit amounted to approximately 719,727 DEXE. CEFFU either transfers directly to Binance spot or transfers to Binance spot after 0x98. (See Figures 1 and 2)
2. The custodian of ceffu is dwf, and only dwf accepts dexe as collateral for lending and enters ceffu. According to the Falcon documentation, DWF can choose to place bonus assets in DEXs for CEX-DEX arbitrage, or enter CEXs by mirroring CEFFU to execute trading strategies as profits. (See Figure 3)
3. MirrorX does not simply store assets on exchanges; it keeps assets held in Ceffu Custody while generating a 1:1 mapped position (Mirror Position) on the exchange.
In other words, exchanges can directly use this mapped position for trading, risk control, margin adjustment, and price protection, while the original assets remain in the Ceffu custody system.
4. According to USDF's yield mechanism, Falcon's risk control mechanism can maintain the collateral system's health by reducing positions, selling spot assets, and liquidating low-pressure assets. According to the official CEFFU documentation, the person initiating the image must be the creator or administrator.
Therefore, DEXE holders or project teams stake to Falcon--- Falcon custody to CEFFU—Falcon to CEFFU, initiate the Mirrox strategy, and dump Binance spot trading. (See Figure 4)
5. Whether there was a problem with the DWF strategy, leading to liquidation or selling of positions. Before liquidation, CEFFU also conducted a 2dexe transfer test through 0x98 (see Figure 2), and the actual liquidation mechanism was automatic, which felt more like a premeditated dump.
In summary: The crash in DEX was likely caused by DWF deliberately using DEXE's collateral in FF to sell shares via ceffu and mirror the price on Binance spot trading.At first, I thought SHIB had some new positive news about this wave
After looking around, the so-called "419 million coins destroyed in 24 hours" sounds intimidating, but it only adds up to just over $2,000
Meanwhile, SHIB rose 36% intraday, with its market value once increasing by nearly $1 billion
Clearly, this big bullish candlestick wasn't created by burning it
The real spark was Korean capital. SHIB/KRW on Upbit had a turnover exceeding $60 million. The spot market first surged upward, then crushed a batch of short sellers, and the market kept rolling and growing
However, DOGE only rose about 6% during the same period, and SHIB itself did not show any major positive news
So I feel this feels more like SHIB suddenly having a sudden outburst, and it's far from a comeback for Meme season
But old memes do have this ability: when they're half-dead, the market can find something everyone recognizes, has enough liquidity, and is elastic when pulled up, and it can immediately crawl out of its grave
As for the destruction, it was probably just a story that later added to that bullish candlestick
The coins were bought by Korean capital; the story is that $SHIB only appeared after the price had risen I retrieved the chip structure from April, and obviously the blank zone between 76k-80k has been partially filled, but the accumulated chip volume at 61k and 63k has reached its peak, which is quite interesting.
1. The massive chip concentration might represent a historical bottom, an ultra-strong support level, where selling pressure can't break it down, and a large amount of turnover holds it up.
2. If it breaks down and cannot recover in a short time, it will become the strongest resistance level in this bear market, with massive trapped chips suppressing the price, possibly triggering panic selling of chips above 80k, and the market will move to the next bottom consensus area to rebuild the bottom.
Therefore, I believe now is the true watershed moment for the market.
$BTC Over the past week, there has been a noteworthy change in the cryptocurrency ETF market: funds have not left the crypto market but are rechoosing their direction. For the week ending July 24, Ethereum spot ETFs recorded a net inflow of about $103.9 million, maintaining net inflows for the third consecutive week and becoming the largest asset attracting funds among all major cryptocurrency spot ETFs during the same period. Meanwhile, although Bitcoin ETFs still maintain weekly net inflows, the pace of inflows has clearly slowed; Meanwhile, products related to Hyperliquid's ecosystem token HYPE experienced capital outflows for the second consecutive week. The signals from this data are not complicated: institutional funds are still willing to allocate crypto assets, but currently lean toward Ethereum, which has ample liquidity, high market depth, and relatively mature investment logic, rather than continuing to chase new products that have just entered the institutionalization phase. Ethereum ETFs attracted funds for three consecutive weeks. According to SoSoValue data, in the past three weeks, the weekly net inflows of Ethereum ETFs were approximately $84 million; * $105 million; * $103.9 million. From the perspective of capital flow, Ethereum ETFs did not surge suddenly due to large single-day buying but maintained relatively stable net inflows for three consecutive weeks. This trend is often more noteworthy than a single weekly explosive growth. This indicates that institutional allocation to Ethereum is not driven by short-term events, but rather by a continuous adjustment of positions. Especially with Bitcoin ETFs flowing in quickly$ESP
This round of rally is based on modular L2 shared sequencing narratives + ecosystem collaboration implementation,
The direct driver is the rotation of capital in the sector + price elasticity brought by small circulation units,
Combined with the warming sentiment among the major mountain strongholds.
But this is a bearish rebound rally,
It's not a trend reversal,
The height of the rally heavily depends on sustained new positive catalysts
，
Without sustained major news, it is very easy to rise and then fall.#多数党领袖称CLARITY休会前难通过
Next week's macro showdown week: FOMC holding steady is not good news; beware of "hawkish holdback" and a double shakeout by yen unwinding
Next week will mark the most critical macro showdown week of the entire third quarter. The Federal Reserve's July FOMC meeting, the Bank of Japan's (BOJ) interest rate decision, and earnings reports from tech giants like SK Hynix will all dominate the market.
Many people shouted in the group, "The decision to hold things on in July is already confirmed; when all the negative news is gone, it's positive." To be honest, if you approach high leverage with such a simplistic and crude mindset, next week you are very likely to fall into the shakeout trap of the macro super week.
Let's break down the core logic of next week's crypto market based on current liquidity and game nodes:
First, the probability of the Fed "holding back hawkishly" is extremely high. CME rate data has already priced the probability of no rate hikes or cuts in July to over 90%. This means that "holding back" itself carries no premium; the market is trading purely based on Powell's forward-looking guidance at the press conference. With the 10-year Treasury yield firmly anchored at 4.7%, as long as Powell hints that the threshold for a September rate cut remains high, those high-leverage long positions on the market that rely on "early trading rate cuts" will be liquidated in an instant.
Second, the Bank of Japan (BOJ) policy meeting conceals hidden risks from liquidity unwinding. Everyone is watching the Fed, but often overlooks the yen. If the Bank of Japan signals hawkish or raises interest rates, yen appreciation will directly trigger a global wave of "yen carry trades" to unwind. To make up margin, multinational hedge funds indiscriminately sell high-beta risk assets, causing liquidity drainage for BTC and US stocks.
Third, liquidity in the market remains tight. Over the past week, the average daily inflow of stablecoins across the network remained at a nearly one-year low, with only key support levels presetting about $3.3 billion in major force limit buys. This shows that the main players have no intention of buying and breaking through the market price upward; they are merely holding sponge positions at low levels while retail investors cut losses.
My trading conclusion: Before the FOMC and BOJ decisions are implemented next week, the market is very likely to remain volatile with low volume, and any low-volume rally is a trigger for a long shakeout.
Do you think Powell will hawk or dove next week? Will the yen unwinding trigger a new round of shakeouts? Let's talk in the comments.
$BTC $ETH $ALLO $KAITO BULLISH MOMENTUM BUILDING, HIGH PROBABILITY CONTINUATION SETUP
Long #KAITO
Entry: $1.185 - $1.205
SL: $1.145
TP1: $1.235
TP2: $1.280
TP3: $1.350
After a powerful impulsive rally, $KAITO is holding above its recent breakout zone instead of giving back gains, which suggests buyers are still defending higher prices. The current pullback looks like healthy consolidation around a fresh demand area, while the $1.18-$1.20 region is acting as key support. A sustained hold above this level keeps the path open for a retest of $1.232 and, if that liquidity is cleared, continuation toward $1.28-$1.35 becomes the higher-probability scenario. A loss of $1.145 would weaken the bullish structure and invalidate the setup.#EarningsRealityCheck #CLARITYActStalled #USIranStrikePause 📊 Cross-asset quotes | 22:59
WTI crude oil 90.8900 (-2.05%) / Brent crude 93.1600 (-1.85%) / natural gas 2.9040 (-0.17%)
Volatility clues: WTI crude oil changes are more evident; first observe whether this affects dollar liquidity and risk asset sentiment.
Observation perspective: Quote-type content and main account updates are staggered, suitable for supplementing external variables in the crypto market for precious metals, energy, and forex.
Verification point: If these assets diverge from BTC/ETH, prioritize whether risk appetite is being repriced.
For market observation purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.Alert 🚨 (compiled from the latest news. Original: @尘歌壶来) The current price is around 0.35, still below the 50-day EMA at 0.4141 and the 200-day EMA at 0.4654. MACD momentum is approaching zero, RSI is in the middle of 44—the technical outlook remains bearish in the short term. The 1-hour chart is fluctuating narrowly between 0.355 and 0.35, with 0.3438 being the key support formed by the 23.6% Fibonacci retracement level. If this daily chart closes below, the path will directly target the 0.2267 Fibonacci anchor point, which is the 0.23 depth value zone given by the user framework. What truly determines WLD's mid-term fate is the unlock clock, not the tech bit. On-chain visible circulation: starting July 24, WLD's daily unlock volume dropped sharply from 5.1 million to 2.9 million, a 43% decrease—community quotas halved (3.2 million → 1.6 million/day), TFH team and investor quotas dropped by 32% (1.9 million → 1.3 million/day). This is an automatic execution mechanism for write-in, tamper-proof smart contracts, with no cliff-like unlocking. It sounds like great news, but CryptoSlate has broken the ice: as of April 10, 4.9 billion WLD have been unlocked (49% of the total supply of 10 billion), with about 3.3 billion in circulation; By July 8, the circulating supply had risen to 3.52 billion. Techi's analysis is more direct—at current prices, the daily supply of 2.9 million coins is about $1.2 million, accounting for only 0.5 percentage points of WLD's daily trading volume, with minimal direct price impact. FlipReports indicate that SHIB surged 36% today, mainly driven by Korean capital.
This also indirectly explains why EUL doesn't always show waves like those previously listed Korean exchanges.
Because the stock market is closed today, Koreans, who are particularly fond of risk assets, can only shift their attention to cryptocurrencies.
Of course, EUL's rise and sustain for so long is not only due to the Korean market paying the price, but also because the market makers seize the opportunity and have ambition.
If it were other currencies, even if it was on the weekend, they would still have to smash when needed. $SHIB $BTC $ETH While reviewing the Meme sector that evening, I suddenly thought of a question: In the next bull market, can DOGE continue to be the leading meme leader leading the charge?
I think this issue shouldn't be judged solely by whether Musk will continue to speak up.
Dogecoin in 2021 indeed created a very unusual market trend.
Back then, the meme sector wasn't as crowded as it is now, and there weren't as many choices in the market. A large amount of retail investor sentiment and speculative funds were concentrated in DOGE.
A single move by Musk can cause DOGE to experience huge fluctuations in a short period.
But the current market environment is completely different.
Even when Musk occasionally mentions DOGE recently, market feedback is not as strong as before; more often, it is just a short-term pulse that then returns to its original rhythm.
I don't think this is simply a "loss of Musk's influence," but rather that as market participants increase, funds are becoming more dispersed.
The Meme sector is now extremely competitive.
In the past, when people talked about Memes, many first thought of DOGE; But now, the on-chain ecosystem keeps expanding, especially with new meme assets emerging in Solana, such as PEPE and BONK, which have attracted massive capital and attention.
The same speculative capital now has more options and will not revolve around DOGE as it used to.
Another change is that DOGE's once most captivating story is gradually cooling down.
Back then, the narrative of "DOGE on Mars" was very moving, and many believed that with the development of Musk and SpaceX, Dogecoin might become part of future space payments.
This story truly gives the market a lot of room for imagination.
But after a few years, people gradually realized that time will take time to prove between grand vision and real realization. A story can drive sentiment, but long-term prices ultimately require new demand, new applications, or new capital to drive the market.
So my view is that DOGE is not without opportunities.
It still maintains strong brand recognition, a massive community base, and a historical position that other Meme coins find hard to replicate.
But if you expect it to simply replicate the crazy market of 2021, I think the difficulty will be much higher than before.
In the next bull market, there will likely still be capital entering the meme sector, but the competition mode will change. In the past, it might have been "whoever is more famous rises," but in the future, it will be more about capital heat, community activity, and market narratives jointly determining who can stand out.
For myself, I don't assume DOGE will be strong just because of its past glory, nor will I completely dismiss it just because Musk's influence is waning.
The greatest advantage of established assets is consensus, but the biggest challenge is also how to find new growth stories.
The biggest fear in trading is using past successful experiences to predict completely different market environments. $SKHYNIX The early morning construction log shows that the validator exited the elevator shaft and cleared it to the zero floor. The massive steel truss that once accumulated 2.6M ETH was unloaded, and the temporary support structures poured in by the staking protocol were finally removed. A new batch of load-bearing columns is being cured in the foundation, with 2.48M ETH of concrete awaiting a 43-day setting cycle.
Only architects can understand this moment of stress transition: when the exit queue reaches zero, it means the previously overloaded cantilever arm is unloaded, and the structure's self-weight returns to the main load-bearing system. The accelerated growth of entry queues is like adding loads to an already stable foundation, which is an extreme test of the floor's load-bearing capacity. I opened the white paper design and saw that the original load design was a 16.67% staking rate (about 20 million ETH), while the current 33.55% load has already caused creep cracks in the load-bearing wall—2.64% APR is the concrete shrinkage rate, which tells you whether the material is at its elastic limit or plastic flow.
The total amount of steel for construction (ETH) is about 122 million units, with 40.9 million pieces currently locked as prefabricated floor slabs within steel frame structures (885,000 active nodes). The rebar that disappeared from the exit queue was transferred into the inventory of the entry queue, forming a new structural grid. This dynamic balance determines the ceiling height of the building: if the incoming load continues to exceed the return load, the ceiling height will be compressed; Otherwise, cavities will form. Historically, such a dense two-way tower crane scheduling has never been seen before—on one side, the unloading hooks are empty; on the other, the loading pump trucks have queued for 43 days.
For designers, the most dangerous thing is not load size, but eccentricity. When net staking flow reverses from outflow to inflow, the center of mass of the entire building shifts. We need to recalculate the anti-overturning moment to ensure the redundant design of the underlying architecture can withstand this lateral shear force. As for whether the attached steel cable, called "US XMSTR," can be stretched simultaneously—that's something only structural engineers care about. I only know that any skyscraper's load-bearing wall will have cracks and rebar during renovations. # #ethexitqueuezero马斯克，身价暴跌，调侃自己是“（前）万亿富翁”！特斯拉股价本周跌近20%，创2022年以来最大单周跌幅，SpaceX股份创IPO以来最低水平
过去一周，马斯克的财富版图遭遇了剧烈的“地壳运动”。他旗下的两家上市公司本周表现糟糕。特斯拉股价本周累跌近20%，收于313.03美元/股，创下2022年以来最大单周跌幅；SpaceX则收于115.07美元/股，为该公司上个月IPO以来的最低水平。
彭博亿万富翁指数的数据显示，马斯克的个人财富在短短五个交易日内蒸发了约1300亿美元（约合8800亿元人民币），而就在几周前，他刚刚成为人类历史上首位身家突破1万亿美元的富豪。
马斯克本人在社交平台上调侃自己是“（前）万亿富翁”。
特斯拉股价暴跌源于特斯拉本周三晚间公布的第二季度业绩不及预期。财报显示，特斯拉二季度实现营收282.4亿美元，超出市场预期，同比增长26%，为三年来首次营收同比增速超过20%。但二季度运营利润仅3.98亿美元，远低于市场预期的13.9亿美元；调整后每股收益为0.33美元，同比下降18%，大幅不及预期。
据报道，特斯拉第二季度利润意外下滑，主要原因是通过提供折扣来提振电动汽车销量。公司截至6月的三个月调整后净利润为12亿美元，较上年同期下降17%，低于华尔街预期的19亿美元。
报道提及，美国政府大幅削减了7500美元的电动汽车税收抵免，并废除了鼓励电动汽车生产的相关规定，此后特斯拉在美国市场遭遇困境。该公司向竞争对手出售监管积分、帮助其抵消排放所得的收入，从一年前的4.39亿美元降至1.46亿美元。
与此同时，为推动进军AI和机器人领域，特斯拉的资本支出较去年同期增加了一倍多。这笔支出导致公司两年来首次出现季度现金消耗，自由现金流为负11亿美元。马斯克向投资者表示，公司仍按计划在2026年全年投资超过250亿美元，几乎是上一年的三倍。
公开信息显示，特斯拉股价今年已累计下跌近30%，在科技巨头中表现最差。
与此同时，SpaceX股价虽然在上市后经历了飙升，但过去一个月持续走低。过去五周中有四周下跌，截至目前距离收盘高点已累计下跌约43%。
Capital.com高级市场分析师Daniela Hathorn表示，SpaceX股价下跌是“获利了结、估值重新评估以及此前极度乐观仓位消退”的共同结果。#财报观察员：谁能看懂谷歌和特斯拉这次的真实答卷？ $TSLA $ORDI
🔵 ORDI is up 6.46% to $3.78, but the MACD is negative – this is a dead cat bounce in a downtrend.** The RSI6 at 29 is weak, and the KDJ is showing no bullish conviction whatsoever. The SAR at $3.87 is acting as a heavy ceiling. The 24‑hour high of
4.10
i
s
a
d
i
s
t
a
n
t
m
e
m
o
r
y
.
∗
∗
I
′
m
s
h
o
r
t
i
n
g
4.10isadistantmemory.∗∗I
′
mshortingORDI at $3.78 with a target of $3.65, and if the SAR holds, $3.50 is next. The ordinals are about to get rekt – short it.#美军暂停对伊空袭, negotiations on the opening of the strait made progress
When the pineapple-haired 🍍 guy saw the words "pause airstrikes," his first reaction wasn't positive news. First, let's confirm: has the Strait of Hormuz actually opened?
Currently, the U.S. has indeed suspended a new round of airstrikes on Iran, and both sides are discussing the issue of navigation through diplomatic channels, but this is not a formal ceasefire nor a final agreement 🤷
The focus of the negotiations is to reduce Iran's restrictions on ship passage, allowing energy transport to gradually resume. The Strait of Hormuz handles about one-fifth of the world's oil transport, and once navigation resumes, the war premium on oil prices may truly decrease
🍍 The problem is that the situation has not fully cooled down
Although the U.S. military has suspended airstrikes, the maritime blockade of Iran continues; The conflict has also spread to the Red Sea and Caspian Sea, with the Houthis attacking Saudi energy facilities
So now, I won't judge that oil prices will immediately return to normal just because of a "pause in airstrikes."
🍍 I will continue to look at three things:
First, has a formal navigation agreement for the straits appeared?
Second, can the tanker steadily resume navigation, rather than just verbal release?
Third, will there be new attacks on energy facilities in the Red Sea and Saudi Arabia?
It's also simple for crypto users,
When the strait truly resumes navigation, oil prices and inflationary pressures ease, making it easier for U.S. Treasury yields to fall.
If only a few days of air raids are suspended but shipping and energy facilities remain unsafe, the market may quickly re-trade risksAlert🚨 (Compiled from the latest news, Original: @尘歌壶来) (Summary and analysis results at the end for quick reference) 1. Real readings from the derivatives side according to Coinglass: RE perpetual latest price 0.6046, down 7.77% in 24 hours, futures trading volume $103.6 million, spot trading volume $33.84 million, open interest $38.05 million. Funding rates are negative on most platforms across the network—Binance -0.0990%, Bybit -0.1029%, Gate -0.0982%, MEXC -0.0986%, only HTX slightly positive at 0.0050%. Sharpe Terminal aggregates 9 platforms: Gate, Bitget, BingX, KuCoin, OKX, MEXC, Binance all have "shorts paying fees," Bybit slightly "longs paying fees." Translated into on-chain language: shorts are paying rent to hold positions; this is not "shorts taking profit to suppress prices," but "bears betting but accumulating costs"—once the price reverses, negative funding rates will accelerate short covering. 2. Misalignment in liquidation structure: 24-hour total network liquidations $911,300, longs $474,700, shorts $436,600, almost evenly split. 1-hour liquidation volume nearly equal at $44,800 (longs $22,700 / shorts $22,100) Alert 🚨 (compiled from the latest news, original: Chenge Hulai) (summary at the end can be viewed directly for analysis). Let's first recalculate the scale. The user's 0.38-0.55 support and resistance framework corresponds to BEAT's early micro-cap phase. However, the latest CoinGlass aggregation shows Audiera BEAT's current price is $2.2789, a 24-hour surge of 37.26%, with 288 million tokens in circulation, market cap $647 million, and open interest in contracts $145 million 24-hour contract turnover $5.755 billion, spot traded $191 million. The 0.38-0.55 in user data has already been left ten streets behind by the market—this article can't be written as the original framework of "buy the dip 0.38-0.40"; that's Kezhou Qiujian. 1-hour chart spot price around 2.28 is fiercely contested, 24-hour range is 1.60-2.40, single-day volatility nearly 50%. Public aggregated long-short ratio: mainstream platform large players' long-short ratio is between 0.95-1.08 (neutral to slightly bullish). Binance's top traders' long-short ratio reached 1.47 (slightly bullish), while OKX's account long-short ratio was only 0.57 (slightly bearish). Large players split, retail investors are bearish—a typical 'smart money buys, retail investors chase shorts' eve squeeze structure. 24-hour liquidation data reveals the truth: 1.325 million USD was liquidated across the network, of which 1.253 million were short liquidations (94.6%). As prices rose, bears were heavily triggered. The peak liquidation occurred in 7Poolin was once the largest Bitcoin mining pool and is now filing for bankruptcy
Poolin, which once controlled nearly 20% of Bitcoin's hashrate, has fallen into Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings, with debts reaching $173 million. This was a brutal decline, but headlines alone don't tell you how much of the debt has already been priced in by the market.
The only real offer currently on the table is: acquiring a mining site in Texas for $52 million—just a small fraction of what creditors are owed. At the current $BTC levels level, mining profit margins are thin, and this case will test how much residual value a once-dominant mining pool still retains in bankruptcy.
For $BTC, this is more like an emotional headline than a structural change. When a pool collapses, hash rate is quickly reallocated. The real question is: will this trigger broader pressure among miners with similar leverage characteristics—$ETH $DOGE #以太坊验证者退出队列已降至零 #以太坊验证者退出队列已降至零 #初请18 7,000 below expectations, with interest rates under pressure 🟩 $DOGE LONG SETUP
📍 Entry: $0.0728–$0.0730
🎯 TP1: $0.0740 • TP2: $0.0755 • TP3: $0.0770
🛑 SL: $0.0712
📊 Analysis: +3.84% makes DOGE one of the strongest movers here. If it holds above $0.0728, momentum can continue toward higher targets. Avoid chasing a sudden spike.
#EarningsRealityCheck #CLARITYActStalled #USIranStrikePause $DOGE Alert 🚨 (compiled from the latest news. Original: @尘歌壶来) The current price is consolidating at 58.79, holding above the 1-hour MA20 at 58.46. 58.97 is the intraday high + first supply wall, and 59.48 is the hard upper limit of the 4-hour Bollinger upper band. The 1-hour chart is at EMA7/EMA25 consolidating, so the short-term direction hasn't been selected. However, the 50-day EMA overlaps at 58.94 and the 58-60 support zone, so the institutional cost anchor is under pressure. On the contract side of public aggregation, HYPE's perpetual comprehensive long-short ratio is 1.03, funding rate +0.0042%, indicating traders remain bullish. But in the past 24 hours, the entire network was liquidated by $14.92 million, with long positions surging 14.71 million and short positions only 200,000—the long explosion is 70 times the short explosion, indicating that the rebound between 58 and 60 was driven out by long positions, not by short positions. The skeleton's reading—"long positions increased to 123, short positions decreased, and the entry price for big players was 59.87"—matched this reading: institutional investors accumulated shares at 58-60, while leveraged retail long positions were spot-cleaned above 59. The on-chain deflation engine data needs to be considered separately; it is HYPE's fatal weakness compared to other platforms: protocol daily fee revenue ranges between 1 million and 2 million USD, 30-day fees are 65.9 million USD, and the annualized run rate is about 828 million USD. 99% of protocol revenue is used to buy back HYPE on the open market and send it to the burn address. So far, a total of 46.8 million+ HYPE tokens have been burned, accounting for about 4.6% of the initial total supply, resulting in a decrease in circulating supplyAlert 🚨 (compiled from the latest news, original: @尘歌壶来) (summary at the end can be viewed directly for analysis) 1. The unlock clock sounds before the price. According to RootData, it was forwarded by ChainCatcher that ZAMA will unlock about 279.58 million tokens at 0:00 Beijing time on July 2, with a valuation of approximately $8.69 million. Total supply is 11 billion tokens, currently circulating 2.2 billion tokens, with a circulation rate of only 20%. A single unlock accounts for about 12.7% of circulation—a major supply event for small-cap FHE targets. The unlock curve shows 20% of the team, 30% of VC+ angels, and 20% of the foundation, totaling 70% still locked. The rules are: 1 year cliff for teams + 4 years of linearity, with investors continuously releasing. July 2 is just the beginning; the real long-term selling pressure will last for years, but the sharpest short-term blade will be this week. 2. On-chain evidence of large players turning net short sellers shows a 25% decrease in the long-short ratio given by user skeletons and a shift to net short dominance, consistent with publicly available on-chain data. Third-party on-chain monitoring shows ZAMA holds about 2,672 to 2,679 addresses, with the top 10 addresses concentrated as high as 97%—a typical small-cap, high-control structure. KOLs hold only 3 addresses, accounting for 0.065%. Although Smart Money addresses have made a small entrance, the scale is limited. Under this structure, the signal of "big players turning bearish" is extremely valuable: every move by the market controller is direct🚨 *Jensen: "NO CHIP BUST FOR A WHILE"*
"THIS TIME IS DIFFERENT" 📈
Actual: 3 customers = 54% of NVIDIA 💥 revenue
META 21% | OPENAI/ORACLE 17% | XAI 16%
2026 Capex Hyperscaler: $785B → 2027: ∼$1T 💸
TSMC $60-64B | Intel $20B. The U.S. plant runs only 72.2% 🏭
Trillions of dollars poured into demand from several companies
Just 1 Capex cut, the whole chip is forecast to change color ⚠️
Jensen may be right about AI. But the risk of concentration is real
$BTC BTC's sideways trading structure has partially diverged into valuation offenses, but the derivatives market has yet to price in tail concentration risks.
In current price action, which expectations have already been overleverened, and which positions are exposed to the vulnerability of a direction reversal?
- The original post observed that market funds are highly concentrated in a few tokens: BTC serves as a liquidity anchor, ETH represents institutional interest, SOL plays a high beta role, TAO and WLD lead the AI track, HYPE maps risk appetite, and DOGE and ZEC reflect retail sentiment. This stratification itself has been partially reflected in price, but the part not yet priced in is whether, under divergence, the implied volatility and funding rates in the derivatives market have become overly concentrated in a few positions.
- Key changes in the current market structure: net spot inflows are concentrated in small-cap tokens like JELLYJELLY, OPG, SLX, while momentum from tokens like BEAT, EDGE, TRUMP, and VIRTUAL is declining. This extreme divergence means that market makers and leveraged traders may overconcentrate their positions in the same direction (such as going long on strong coins or short on weak ones), increasing skew risk in the derivatives market.
- Transmission logic: If BTC remains sideways, leverage costs (funding rates) may remain positive on strong coins, attracting more arbitrageurs. However, once BTC experiences directional fluctuations (such as breaking through key support), concentrated long positions face chain liquidation pressure, which in turn amplifies selling of weak coins through the BTC-ETH-altcoin liquidity transmission chain. Conversely, if BTC breaks upward, leveraged long positions in strong coins may accelerate further gains, but liquidity depletion in weak coins remains difficult to alleviate.
- Biased bullish path and conditions: BTC must break through and hold above previous highs (e.g., above $73,000), driving funding rates up moderately rather than extremes, while ETH needs to show sustained signals of institutional buying (e.g., continuous expansion of net ETF inflows). In this scenario, strong AI sectors (TAO, WLD) and high-beta assets (SOL, HYPE) may undergo valuation repricing.
- Bearish risk and conditions: If BTC repeatedly fails to test the $68,000-70,000 range, or if the funding rate surges to a historic high on strong coins (annualized 50%+), it will trigger a double kill between long and short. The tail risk lies in the concentration of liquidity among small-cap coins leading to market makers exiting, triggering a liquidity exhaustion event similar to June 2023.
- Key validation signals: Whether the BTC perpetual contract funding rate for Binance and Bybit has exceeded 0.01% for three consecutive days; Whether the open interest of strong coins (such as JELLYJELLY, OPG) increases against the trend when prices stagnate; Is the ETH/BTC exchange rate stabilizing above 0.05?
Conclusion: The current market has price differentiation, but the derivatives market has not yet experienced the vulnerability of centralized positions under price differentiation. Patiently waiting for funding rates to return to neutral, or for BTC to give clear direction, is more in line with risk management discipline than chasing short-term momentum. The risk lies in the possibility that centralized leverage may be exposed before the direction is chosen.
$BTC $ETH $SOL2026年年中以来，A股整体运行在存量资金博弈格局当中，月度日均成交额稳定维持在7500亿至8800亿区间，万亿成交额已经成为阶段性稀缺状态。增量资金入场意愿偏弱、板块轮动速度加快、热点持续性变短，是现阶段市场最鲜明的特征。就在这样偏保守的市场环境之下，A股科技产业板块将于7月27日迎来多重压力集中兑现。外部有美股科技龙头集体回调带来的情绪传导，内部有募资规模高达666亿元的长鑫科技登陆科创板造成流动性分流，叠加科技赛道经过多年炒作后估值与业绩匹配度失衡的内部问题，三重考验交织在一起，注定科技板块会迎来一轮深度的风险校验。 对于普通散户而言，很多人习惯于盯着单日涨跌、跟风各类市场消息，很难看透事件背后的底层运行逻辑。本文摒弃晦涩的专业术语，结合A股数十年真实历史走势、公开产业财报数据，普及散户必须掌握的基础市场常识，拆解本次科技板块面临的三重核心压力，厘清短期情绪扰动与长期产业发展的边界，重在梳理认知、摆正持仓心态，全程不涉及个股交易、仓位调配、择时买卖等投资指导，只为帮助读者建立更成熟的市场判断思维。 一、第一重考验：美股科技大跌，外围情绪传导，压制国内科技赛道整体情绪 近期纳斯达克Don't believe in "gradual closures": BitMart's steps and hidden reefs
The term "phased shutdown," once spoken by a crypto exchange, is basically equivalent to admitting the situation is out of control. The remaining question is never "to close or not," but "what posture to close."
BitMart announced it will cease trading by August 26, 2026, and completely shut down platform operations in January. The trigger seemed clear: BMX tokens plummeted, and users began complaining that withdrawals were delayed. However, writing the cause and effect as "the token price crashed so the platform can't continue" probably overestimates the credit that platform token should have carried—it has never truly been a risk isolation layer, more like a gas meter leaking preemptively.
Withdrawal delays have never been accidental technical failures encountered by crypto exchanges. It is the first visible sign of a liquidity crack, first one or two hours, then a day or two, and finally customer service only replies "Processing it." BitMart did not publicly explain the specific reasons for the delay, nor did it provide proof of reserves or custody, only providing a closure timeline. Based solely on this, we shouldn't rush to interpret "gradual" as "orderly."
A common reversal approach is: exchanges that openly admit difficulties and provide timelines are always more sincere than those that simply cut the network cables. This logic can only be understood as "relative goodwill," but when it comes to asset security, "relative goodwill" does not provide any hard constraints. History repeatedly reminds us that many platforms, under the smoke of "orderly liquidation," end up leaving users with a reversed account balance and an email that never responds to them. BitMart's closure plan spanned nearly half a year, and the extended window itself was both an opportunity for users and a buffer for itself—as for what buffer it was, not a word was mentioned.
The BMX token crash is a driving event, but more attention should be paid to whether there was hidden leverage in the staking mechanism and market-making structure before the crash. Currently, there is no public data to determine whether BMX's crash directly triggered the exchange's repayment gap; it can only be said that the timing of the two is like tightly tightened gears. The only certainty is: the token crashes first, then withdrawals get stuck, and then the platform announces closure. The sequence of arrangements carries strong signaling significance, and there is no need to use announcements to justify the crisis.
Evidence from the opposing side is also easy to find. BitMart still allows withdrawals, which are slow but not completely locked; Its closure announcement was flat-tone, implying it would "assist users with asset management." If a large number of users successfully withdraw funds in the coming months and evidence of ongoing payments can be found on-chain, then the "gradual closure" might shed its past notoriety in the industry. But you must distinguish between "can be picked" and "you can pick up." Delayed arrival itself is a kind of liquidity rationing: just because someone can withdraw doesn't mean everyone can.
The subsequent indicators were more honest than any statement: whether there was a unilateral early termination of trading before August 26, whether withdrawal thresholds were secretly raised, whether BMX prices remained near zero, whether the team had publicly responded to any specific payment plan—and most importantly, whether a large number of real users confirmed their full withdrawals. Without these, any "gradual closure" narrative is just bubbles like a drowning person grabbing driftwood.
The exchange is free to go bankrupt, but users cannot afford to trust easily. BitMart's timeline is a question mark, not a guarantee. Don't wait until the ship sinks to study the number of lifeboat seats; now is the time to check if you're already standing at the edge of the deck.Alert 🚨 (compiled from the latest news. Original: @尘歌壶来) The current price is consolidating near 0.946. Daily RSI(7) is 76.93, RSI (14) is 73.74. Momentum is strong, but all cycles are in stretch zones. A pause or retest does not break the trend, but caution is advised with intraday moves. The previous daily candle closed at 0.999, close to the 1.00 confirmation threshold, with the spot market reference at 0.953. After the sharp rise, the structure remains positive, but after unlocking, volatility amplifies in both directions. What truly determines KAITO's short-term fate is not the resistance from users at 1.07, but the unlock clock. On-chain circulation is visible. On July 20, Core Contributors scheduled to release 17.6 million KAITO, equivalent to about $16.8 million at market price, a cyclical unlock around the 20th of each month. Daily spot trading volume was $38.3 million, more than twice the market value of a single unlock, providing a sufficient but limited buffer. The problem isn't this time, but in circulation rate—currently circulating 241 million out of a total of 1 billion, with a circulation rate of 24.1%. Continued unlocking in the future will be due to structural selling pressure. Contract-side liquidation structure must align with the skeleton: Coinglass's liquidation heatmap clearly states that 0.85 is the liquidity threshold for KAITO/USDT. Within 24 hours, the entire network was liquidated $199,600, with 154,500 long positions and 45,000 short positions, with long positions accounting for 77.42%—the leveraged long positions were washed out in the pullback mode, and the skeleton's daily RSI was overbought#Majority Leader Says CLARITY Unlikely to Pass Before Recess
The US crypto regulatory bill CLARITY faces new challenges again.
John Thune, the US Senate Majority Leader, recently stated that the likelihood of the CLARITY bill passing before the August congressional recess is low. This means the regulatory benefits the market previously anticipated may be further delayed, and the crypto industry will continue to face policy uncertainty in the short term.
The slowdown in the bill's progress is not due to a change in the direction of digital asset regulation, but because significant disagreements remain between the two parties over certain provisions.
Currently, the disputes mainly focus on digital asset ethics clauses, the division of enforcement authority, and arrangements related to stablecoin interests. Democrats believe the current constraints are insufficient, while Republicans want to quickly push for a unified digital asset regulatory framework. Both sides are still seeking a compromise that can be accepted.
Meanwhile, the banking industry has also expressed concerns about some stablecoin provisions, fearing that funds might further flow into the stablecoin system, putting pressure on traditional bank deposits, which complicates the coordination of the bill.
From the market performance perspective, investors have already begun to reprioritize.
Previously, the market generally believed CLARITY would be implemented quickly this year. Now, as the time window narrows, expectations for regulatory benefits have clearly cooled. For mainstream crypto assets like $BTC and $ETH, this means a lack of new policy catalysts in the short term, and market sentiment may continue to be affected.
However, I believe the delay of CLARITY does not mean a reversal in the direction of US regulation.
Whether legislation is completed this year or next, the overall direction of establishing a digital asset regulatory system in the US has not changed. More institutional funds are entering the crypto market, and traditional financial institutions continue to advance their layouts in tokenized assets, stablecoins, and digital asset services. The implementation of the regulatory framework is only a matter of time.
For investors, the short-term focus should be on whether the bill can get a new voting arrangement and whether the two parties can make a breakthrough before the recess; the long-term focus should be on whether increased regulatory certainty in the US will attract more institutional funds into the market.
Therefore, the real impact of the CLARITY bill is not on the long-term value of $BTC, but on market sentiment and capital flow rhythm.
Regulation can be delayed, but the trend toward industry compliance has not changed. What truly determines the next market cycle remains global liquidity, institutional capital inflows, and long-term capital allocation after the regulatory framework is finally implemented.
$LAB South Korean pension funds finally bought back Korean stocks in July.
According to Korea Exchange data, as of July 24, pension funds had net purchases of 68.4 billion Korean won in Korean stocks, marking the first time this year that they had turned net buying, following 10 consecutive weeks of selling positions.
Buying is also concentrated in SK Hynix. In previous weeks, the market repeatedly traded fears that the National Pension Fund would sell 74 trillion KRW, but after the rebalancing window opened, institutions actually picked up chip stocks during pullbacks.
What I find interesting is this: the capital attitude has shifted from "rebalancing positions" to "buying back at low levels."
Bears have their reasons; 68.4 billion KRW is not large for KOSPI, and a monthly net buy does not prove a trend reversal. Next, let's look at two numbers: whether net buying continued in August, and whether SK Hynix remains the top buying direction.
Fat friends, just because institutions dare to take the flying knife doesn't mean the knife has already landed.
#韩国股市 #韩股 #SK海力士⚡ $PIEVERSE In-depth Analysis: Opportunities and Risks from a Bearish Perspective
1. Market Overview
$PIEVERSE experienced dramatic fluctuations within the 15-minute cycle, currently quoted at 0.7474 USDT, with a single-day increase of 16.39%. The recent high reached 0.9929, the low was at 0.6216, and the price remains within a wide range of fluctuations. Trading volume was 359,952,000, significantly below the average level, indicating insufficient capital follow-up.
2. Technical diagnosis
Moving average signals: MA(7)=0.7760, MA(30)=0.8785, short-term moving averages crossing below long-term moving averages, indicating a weak trend.
Candlestick pattern: surging then pulling back, a typical "false breakout" pattern, indicating heavy selling pressure above.
RSI indicators: 13.23, 25.24, 39.08, all in a severely oversold range. There may be a technical rebound in the short term, but overall momentum is insufficient.
Volatility: High volatility, extremely risky short-term trading.
3. Macro and sentiment aspects
Market sentiment: Panic selling is evident, investor confidence is lacking.
External environment: The US dollar index is stable, risk appetite is declining, and funds remain cautious about highly volatile assets.
4. Traders' practical perspectives
I opened a short position at 0.812 USDT, currently with a floating profit of 97.59%. This operation is based on the following logic:
The signal for a sharp rise and pullback is clear: the price quickly surged and then quickly pulled back, indicating heavy selling pressure above.
Insufficient trading volume: The rise lacks capital support, making a false breakout highly likely.
Sentiment is bearish: Under panic sentiment, funds tend to flow out rather than in.
The profit from this short position validates the coexistence of risks and opportunities during periods of high market volatility.
5. Risk Warning
Although the RSI is oversold, it may fall into the "oversold trap," with risks of further decline.
Insufficient trading volume and lack of capital support for rebounds.
Short-term volatility is volatile and prone to false rebounds.
6. Strategic Recommendations
Short-term trading: Participate cautiously; if you rebound, strictly stop losses (recommended stop-loss below 0.72).
Mid-term strategy: Wait for prices to stabilize and increase trading volume before considering entry.
Risk control: Position should not exceed 20% of total funds, avoiding heavy positions during periods of high volatility.
📌 Summary: $PIEVERSE The current trend is full of uncertainty, with both the possibility of a short-term rebound and the risk of further decline. My short trading has achieved significant unrealized profits, but that doesn't mean the market will keep falling. For traders, this is a stage where "panic and opportunity coexist," with the key being position management and disciplined execution.1. Real-time Price (July 26, 22:40) • Current price: $1886, 24-hour increase about +1.3%, intraday fluctuation range 1860–$1898, overall slight rebound • 24-hour turnover about $10.16 billion, volume down nearly 60% from the 30-day average, market trading sentiment is sluggish, with mostly bulls and bears taking a wait-and-see approach • Market cap about $230.3 billion, all-time high $4948, currently retraced over 62% from the high, still in the medium- to long-term bear market range • Up 2.98% over the past 7 days, rebound 21% over the past 30 days, overall decline over the past year over 50%, indicating a technical recovery after oversold conditions II. Core Drivers of Short-Term Gains (Reasons for Today's Rebound) 1. Marginal easing of geopolitical risks: Tensions in the Strait of Hormuz in the Middle East have eased, diplomatic talks between Iran and Oman have signaled easing, global risk appetite has slightly restored, and BTC and ETH have led all cryptocurrencies to rise slightly. As long as the Middle East conflict does not escalate, risk assets will remain weak and oscillating during recovery. 2. Institutional funds provide structural support: Large asset management firms recently staked ETH worth $184 million; Bitmine continues to hoard coins, with total holdings approaching 5% of circulating supply; US spot ETH staking ETFs returned to net capital inflows in July, indicating that institutional long-term allocation needs have not completely disappeared. 3. On-chain circulating supply continues to tighten: 33.56% of circulating ETH across the network is staked and locked and cannot be traded; The number of staking queues far exceeds exits, reducing supply from the bottom to slow selling pressure,After the PoL Next upgrade launched, Berachain's market experienced significant volume fluctuations, $BERA the price surged rapidly in the short term, and market funds are repricing around changes in the underlying economic model.
The BGT mechanism was retired and switched to WBERA settlement, a change that directly altered the allocation logic of on-chain incentives and lowered the entry barrier for liquidity participation.
The original veteran miner group is facing structural adjustments in incentive models, and this restructuring of profit distribution has triggered market debates over long-term lock-up willingness.
If the new mechanism can effectively drive significant TVL growth, liquidity release will support prices; conversely, if miners exit due to incentive changes, it may intensify selling pressure risk.
Current market buying sentiment relies on expectations of liquidity premium from WBERA settlement. If the market cannot hold above the current range, it indicates that consensus on the new mechanism has not yet been reached.
Observing the trend of on-chain TVL in the coming days is a key indicator to verify whether this economic model upgrade can translate into actual asset accumulation.
#参议院CLARITY法案下周或表决: Favorable Moments or Shortcoming? #三星Galaxy钱包将原生支持稳定币 #SPCX因星舰发射与解禁引发多空分歧Starship's 13th Test Flight Success: What SPCX Truly Wants to Deliver Is More Than Just One Launch'
On July 24, SpaceX completed Starship's 13th comprehensive flight test. According to the AP live report, the rocket launched from Texas, releasing 20 Starlink V3 satellites for the first time; The spacecraft then completed a soft splash in the Indian Ocean. The incident occurred on July 24, with related reports released between July 24 and 25.
The value of this mission lies in Starship's first time advancing the "next-generation Starlink carrier" from simulated payloads to real satellite testing. Twenty V3 satellites were released at an altitude of about 200 kilometers and completed laser, radio communication, and data return within about 20 minutes before reentry. But it's important to clarify: this is a suborbital test, the satellite was suborbitally burned afterward, and it did not directly become new operational capacity; The booster also descended too quickly on the return trip due to insufficient restart of the engine. A successful test flight reduced some engineering uncertainties, but that does not mean the commercialization pace has been set.
The core cash flow behind SPCX still mainly comes from Starlink. SpaceX disclosed to the SEC that as of March 31, it had about 9,600 in-orbit broadband and mobile satellites and 10.3 million Starlink subscribers; In the first quarter, the connectivity business generated $3.257 billion in revenue and operating profit of $1.188 billion. In comparison, the aerospace business had $619 million in revenue and $662 million in operating losses during the same period, and paid Starship $930 million in R&D expenses. In other words, Starship is more like high-investment infrastructure in the short term, and its long-term value depends on whether it can significantly reduce launch costs, expand V3 deployment speed, and ultimately translate into subscriptions and enterprise revenue.
The next more verifiable milestone is the Q2 results on August 4. The market will focus on Starlink user growth, connectivity business profit margins, Starship R&D, and capital expenditure, not just the launch screen. Negative risks include repeated testing schedules, regulatory and spectrum constraints, massive investments, and the sensitivity of high valuations to the speed of growth realization.
Document verification: SpaceX Flight 13 materials, SEC disclosures, SpaceX investor relations announcements, and cross-reconciled with AP reports on July 24.Bitcoin Circulation Layer 38-point sub-indicator
Zero Principle: Bitcoin Ownership Test (Hard Filtering)
1. Unilateral Exit: Can users recover assets without relying on third parties?
2. Finality Inheritance: Is L2 finality anchored to BTC PoW rather than its own consensus?
3. Bridge types: BitVM / Rollup / Multi-signature / MPC? What is the trust assumption?
4. Multi-signature control: Is the signer distribution dispersed enough? Is there a risk of unilateral control?
5. Fraud Proof: Does the fraud certificate truly exist and work?
6. Withdrawal Verification: Has the withdrawal mechanism been market-validated (mainnet operation > 6 months)?
7. L1 Data Pancing: Is state data published to Bitcoin L1, or only stored on the off-chain DA layer?
8. L1 State Recovery: Can nodes fully restore the entire network state using only data on L1?
Elimination criteria: If any item 1-8 fails to meet the standard, the candidate will be eliminated immediately.
First layer: Industry positioning
9. Long-term growth track: Is it a core track of the BTC financial system? Is TAM large enough?
10. Key infrastructure location: Does it belong to the payment/circulation/clearing/smart contract layer? Is it the underlying infrastructure?
11. Non-substitution: Do alternatives exist? How high is the cost of migration for users/developers?
Layer 2: Network Scale
12. BTC asset size: absolute TVL, growth rate, distribution of locked addresses, whale concentration
13. BTC settlement scale: annual settlement amount, BTC turnover rate, daily trading volume, BTC-margined trading volume
14. Native Asset Ecosystem: Number of BTC native assets, stablecoin scale, RWA scale, proportion of high-quality assets, and liquidity depth
Third layer: Security system
15. BTC Security Inheritance: Does BTC PoW inherit? The ultimate source? Do you rely on multi-signature/PoS?
16. Attack resistance: withdrawal timing, fraud proof maturity, historical security incidents, audit status
17. Degree of decentralization: number and distribution of nodes, multi-client implementation, degree of open-source, governance structure
18. Bitcoin Value Alignment: Does it support self-custody, resistance to censorship, and open networks? Long-term team behavior?
19. Indexers and Asset State Security: Who Completes Asset Verification? Is the indexer open source? Are there multiple independent implementations with consistent cross-validation? Is there a roadmap for distributed indexers?
Layer 4: Network effects
20. Infrastructure integration: Broad access for wallets, hardware wallets, SDKs, APIs, browsers, and indexers
21. Developer ecosystem: GitHub activity, number of developers, number of commits, number of native DApps, developer retention rate
22. Application ecosystem and interoperability: DEXs/lending/stablecoins/payments/AI Agents/RWA and other applications; Interoperability with Lightning/other L2/mainnet
Fifth level: Business model
23. Real Revenue: protocol revenue scale, BTC/stablecoin/external revenue ratio, revenue growth rate
24. Node Economic Health: Node yield, proportion of fee income, proportion of inflation, security budget, and node ROI
Layer 6: Value capture
25. Token value capture: gas demand, fee allocation, buyback and burn/staking yields, token demand growth
26. Value Feedback in the BTC Ecosystem: Revenue Flows to BTC Holders/Nodes? MEV Loss? Sequencer value flow?
27. Sequencer Decentralization: Is the sequencer single/POA/permissionless? Who benefits from MEV? Can users bypass the sequencer?
Level 7: Requirements validation
28. Real Needs: Is it a solution for BTC payments/circulation/lending/stablecoins? Does it create new financial demand?
29. User Experience: Is it only required to use BTC? Is it necessary to purchase platform tokens? Operation steps, wallet compatibility?
30. Actual adoption: non-subsidized user growth, DAU/MAU, retention rate, number of business clients, institutional business, and transaction volume excluding brush volume
31. Cyclical Capability: Bear market development activity, node/user retention rate, bull and bear performance, security recovery capability, and duration
32. Withdrawal capital efficiency: Final withdrawal time (instant/1 hour/24 hours/7 days)? Is there an instant withdrawal liquidity pool?
Layer 8: Native asset verification and programmability
33. Asset Verification Paradigm: Who verifies asset status (Indexer/Client/BitVM2 L1 verification)?
34. Asset protocol coverage: Does it support Ordinals/Runes/BRC20/ORDX/RGB/Taproot Assets, etc.?
35. Depth of smart contract programmability: Which contract types (templates/EVM/Agents) are supported? Can contracts directly operate UTXOs?
36. Migration of Mature DeFi Paradigms: Does it support AMM/Curve/Aave/Compound/MakerDAO paradigms? Should you directly operate BTC native assets?
37. Actual adoption of the contract ecosystem: number and types of deployed contracts, actual trading volume and user count, and completeness of the developer toolchain
38. Data Availability and State Recovery: Who Is Responsible for Data Storage? Do users have to back up themselves? Can the project team resume operations independently after shutting down?
Five horizontal observation dimensions
Dimension One: Competitive Advantage
Whether core technological advantages, user growth rate, network effects, liquidity advantages, brand influence, and moat continue to expand
Dimension Two: Ability to Establish Standards
Wallet standards/API standards/payment standards/token standards/development standards, industry adoption rate
Dimension Three: Agreement Neutrality
Is all BTC assets supported? Is the API open? Is it compatible with other L2/Lightning devices? Should we maintain an open ecosystem?
Dimension Four: Antifragility
Bear market performance, regulatory pressure, post-security attack recovery, community self-organizing ability, development sustainability, and whether the network is growing stronger with adversity
Dimension 5: Breadth of interoperability
Is it supported for trust-minimized BTC transfers across L2s?While reviewing the Meme sector that evening, I suddenly thought of a question: In the next bull market, can DOGE replicate the frenzied rally of 2021?
I feel the answer may not be as simple as before.
Dogecoin's biggest feature in 2021 is its highly concentrated narrative.
At that time, there were few options in the entire Meme market, and a large amount of retail funds were concentrated in DOGE. A single Musk's move often becomes a trigger for short-term capital flow, sometimes causing significant intraday fluctuations.
At that stage, DOGE carried very strong emotional value.
But now the market environment has changed.
In the past year, even when Musk occasionally mentioned DOGE, the market reaction was less exaggerated than before; more often, it was just a short-term surge, then quickly returned to its original trend.
I don't think this is simply a "decline in Musk's influence," but more like the market maturing and funds starting to disperse.
The competition in the meme track is far fiercer now than in 2021.
In the past, when people mentioned Meme, their first thought was probably DOGE; But now, a large number of new projects emerge on-chain every day, and the Solana ecosystem keeps giving birth to new meme assets, with brands like PEPE and BONK attracting significant attention.
The liquidity pool remains the same, but with more choices, DOGE naturally finds it hard to dominate as a single player as before.
Another once very captivating story is "DOGE on Mars."
At the time, many believed that with the development of Musk and SpaceX, Dogecoin could become some kind of space payment method in the future, and this imaginative space brought strong market sentiment to DOGE.
But after a few years, people have gradually realized that there is still a long way between grand narratives and actual implementation.
Stories can drive emotions, but ultimately, it depends on whether there are new use cases and sustained funding.
In my own view, DOGE is not without opportunities.
It still maintains extremely high brand recognition, a massive community base, and a very strong historical position among meme coins.
But to replicate the 2021 gains, new catalysts may be needed, rather than just a single shout or an old story.
In the next bull market, the meme rally is very likely to persist, but funds will become more selective. In the past, "fame means price increases," but in the future, more emphasis may be placed on community activity, capital flows, and the duration of market heat.
So for DOGE, I wouldn't simply judge it has no chance, nor do I expect it to easily repeat the past.
The advantage of established memes is strong consensus, but their disadvantage is that their growth potential has already been fully recognized by the market. What truly determines the trend going forward is whether there are new stories, new capital, and new application expectations. $OKB $DOGE $KAITO rose over 26% in 24 hours—Can InfoFi hype turn into token demand?
According to OKX spot market data, as of 22:00 Beijing time on July 26, 2026, KAITO/USDT was trading at about 1.2093 USDT, up about 26.5% in 24 hours, with a high of 1.2318 USDT and a low of 0.9194 USDT, and a trading volume of about 4.477 million USDT. Currently, no public announcement alone explains this round of rally; price performance is more appropriate to first see as funds retrading AI and attention economy narratives.
Kaito is not just an "AI search tool."
Kaito Pro is responsible for organizing encrypted information such as social media, research, governance forums, news, and podcasts, and quantifies projects and narratives in Mindshare; Kaito Studio uses this data for brand-creator matching, campaign execution, and performance attribution; Capital Launchpad attempts to allocate project quotas based on social reputation, on-chain behavior, and historical participation; Mindshare Arena turns brand, trend, and personality attention into a predictable market.
The common logic of this product is to turn previously vague attention into data that can be measured, distributed, and traded.
The demand is real, the project team needs to decide who to allocate the budget to, the traders need to identify narrative rotations, and creators want their influence to be determined more than just the number of followers. Kaito officially disclosed that Kaito Pro has already achieved profitability and serves over 500 investment, marketing, and growth teams; These data can somewhat indicate the direction of commercialization.
Once attention is tied to rewards, participants study scoring rules, and content quantity, homogeneous expression, and account manipulation can all increase. Kaito's early Yaps "post to earn" program ended in January 2026, with the official reason cited as X revoking reward API access. InfoFi can redesign allocation rules but is still subject to changes in social platform data permissions and policies.
KAITO currently serves as an ecosystem trading medium, governance, and staking. Of the official token distribution, 56.67% is allocated to the community and ecosystem, 25% to core contributors, and 8.3% to early investors. Documenting the purpose does not mean the value has been transmitted: current official documentation does not state that Kaito Pro revenue will automatically be distributed to KAITO holders, nor does it disclose a fixed buyback or burn mechanism directly linked to income.
Whether this wave of price can be caught by InfoFi business depends on whether Kaito Pro's paying customers and revenue can grow, whether Studio can generate a budget for recurring activities, whether Launchpad and Mindshare Arena continue to generate usage, and whether staking, governance, and platform transactions can bring stable demand for KAITO.
Kaito is trying to price attention. KAITO also aims to prove that this attention can accumulate into sustained revenue and token demand, not just higher scores on the leaderboard.#多数党领袖称CLARITY休会前难通过
I'm Brother Thorn, and the CLARITY Act is basically dead.
Senate Majority Leader Thune personally stated that the bill is unlikely to pass before the August recess. Bloomberg directly pointed out the core issue: the approximately $1.4 billion in earnings Trump gained from crypto business became the biggest obstacle to the bill's passage. At the beginning of the year, the approval rate surged to 82%, and the market is now only about one-third. Democrats and consumer rights groups criticized the clause for insufficient strength, stating that enforcement power is exercised solely by the Department of Justice, excluding oversight by state attorneys general; Whether moral restrictions cover indirect shareholding and do not restrict officials' children; The terms will automatically expire on January 20, 2029. All three points are major flaws, making it difficult to reach consensus in the short term.
Compromise efforts are ongoing, with Gallego and Tillis exploring solutions, and the banking sector opposing stablecoin yield clauses. But the time window was gone. The August 7 recess was a strict deadline, and the process itself took several days. The actual deadline was July 30. Missing the recess will put the government at risk of shutdown in September, and then entering election season, the difficulty of passing will rise significantly.
The impact on BTC in the short term has already been reflected in the price of disappointing expectations. BTC has fallen from above 66,000 to near 64,000, and the bill's stalling means regulatory uncertainty continues, slowing institutional allocation. However, Zach Pandl, head of research at Grayscale, still holds true: the bottom of the BTC bear market may have already formed, and prices will be driven by real interest rates and economic growth. ETFs have seen net inflows for several consecutive days, with institutions continuously buying in the 64,000 to 65,000 range.
The failure of the CLARITY Act has limited impact on BTC's long-term narrative; BTC does not live on a single bill from the U.S. Congress. The value of non-sovereign assets comes from computing power and consensus, not from Washington's approval.
Ci Ge finished speaking. Hold onto your positions, and don't let political games distract you. Think carefully. $BTC $ETH $DOGE 📊 $SNDK Quick Overview of Liquidation
Scale of liquidations
· 1 hour: $74,800
· 4 hours: $82,000
· 12 hours: $128,100
· 24 hours: $158,900
Mostly and bearish distribution
Cycle: Bull liquidation, short liquidation, long position
1h $0 $74,800 0%
4h $6,804.57 $75,200 8.3%
12h $8,867.71 $119,200 6.9%
24h $30,600 $128,300 19.3%
Duokong interpretation
Across cycles, short blowouts crushed the bulls (24-hour short positions accounted for 80.7%), indicating a sustained short-squeeze rally. Within 1 hour, short liquidations account for 100%, with extreme short squeezes at the open; The 12-hour short position ratio reached 93.1%, the most intense short squeeze of the day; Although the 24-hour bulls have fought back, bears still dominate the market. Ultimate winner: Bulls—Bears face consecutive large-scale liquidations, with prices continuing to rise strongly.
Time distribution
· 1 hour accounts for 47.1% of 24 hours
· 4 hours accounts for 51.6% of 24 hours
· 12 hours accounts for 80.6% of 24 hours
Extreme liquidations are concentrated in the 12-hour cycle (over 80%), indicating that the main wave of short squeezing and rising momentum has exploded within 12 hours; The total 24-hour volume is basically the same as the 12-hour period, with limited growth in the subsequent 12 hours. Currently, the market is at the end of the high level of the short squeeze phase, with bears suffering heavy losses, but caution is needed regarding profit-taking pressure.
A one-sentence explanation
$SNDK 24-hour short liquidations totaled $128,300, accounting for 80.7% of total volume; 12-hour concentrated bursts forced the main bullish wave, with bulls winning decisively.
🔥 Market Barometer | July 24th
Today's three hot topics point to the same theme: the cost of AI, regulatory stalls, and the breathing on the edge of the geopolitical cliff.
📊 Google and Tesla: The "bill" for the AI feast has arrived
Two financial reports have revealed the harsh truth behind AI narratives.
Google beats expectations but comes at a heavy cost: total revenue of $119.8 billion, up 24% year-on-year; Google Cloud revenue was $24.77 billion, an 82% year-on-year increase. However, capital expenditures reached $44.9 billion, and free cash flow turned negative for the first time to -$5.9 billion. After hours, it once fell nearly 5%.
Tesla's revenue growth without profit growth: revenue of $28.24 billion, up 26% year-on-year; However, operating profit was only $398 million, a year-on-year plunge of 57%, with an operating margin of just 1.4%. Free cash flow turned negative for the first time in over two years. It fell more than 4% in after-hours trading.
Signal: Google's AI has formed a closed revenue loop in its cloud business; Meanwhile, Tesla's Robotaxi and Optimus remain at the "story" stage. The market is punishing AI narratives that are concept-heavy but lack cash flow.
📜 CLARITY Act Stalled: A $1.4 Billion Ethical Dilemma
Regulatory hopes for the crypto industry are fading. Although Senate Republicans released updated text and added a morality clause, seven Democratic senators collectively vetoed it. Senate Majority Leader Toon Toon made it clear that the bill is unlikely to pass before the August 7 recess.
Fundamental obstacle: The roughly $1.4 billion gains Trump gained from crypto business became the biggest obstacle. The Democrats are demanding stricter ethical clauses to prevent the president from continuing to profit from the crypto industry under government oversight.
Polymarket forecasts show that the probability of passing within the year has plummeted from over 80% to 37%. Missing the August window and dragging into the autumn elections will greatly reduce the chances of passing in 2026.
🚢 U.S. military pauses airstrikes: a breather on the edge of a geopolitical cliff
On July 25 local time, Trump ordered the U.S. military not to launch new airstrikes on Iran that day, ending a 13-day continuous daily strike campaign.
A few hours before the airstrike pause, the Omani delegation had already arrived in Tehran to begin negotiations to resume navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, reportedly making progress. Brent crude had previously surpassed $100 per barrel, and if negotiations break through, oil prices are expected to retreat.
Signal: This is a tactical pause—to leave room for diplomacy, but the U.S. military is still preparing contingency plans for resuming strikes.
💎 Summary
Three events outline the core contradictions in the current market: The bill for AI is approaching—Google and Tesla are telling the market that, for the first time ever, negative cash flow is heating up faster than expected; The regulatory window is closing—the $1.4 billion ethical dilemma makes it hard for the CLARITY Act to pass within the year; How long the pause in the geography lasts depends on the success or failure of Oman's mediation. #财报观察员: Who can truly understand the real answer sheet from Google and Tesla this time?
#多数党领袖称CLARITY休会前难通过
#美军暂停对伊空袭, negotiations on the opening of the strait made progress Traditional futures moving 24/7 was originally seen as an irreversible trend. However, the CFTC recently extended the comment deadline by 30 days, postponing it to August 26. This is not simply "slowing down approvals," but rather asking: After the market never closes, who guarantees the risk system will never go offline? On July 23, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission announced an extension of the public comment period for two issues: first, the extension of standard futures contracts to 24/7 trading; Second, design perpetual contracts for energy commodities that can be delivered physically or stored. The regulator stated that this extension was due to requests from commentators and added several new issues. The discussion, which was originally close to ending, was postponed to August 26. ## Trading can go on endlessly, but clearing can't rely solely on "scheduling one extra shift." On the surface, 24/7 is just extending trading hours from weekdays to weekends. In fact, it will simultaneously change four systems: - Exchanges need to continuously match and monitor abnormal orders; - The clearing institution needs to calculate margin and default risk in real time; - Brokers need to continue handling client funds during bank breaks; - Market makers need to continue providing bilateral quotes amid weekend news shocks. The crypto market has proven that weekends are not always risk-free. Conversely, when bank payments, fiat deposits, and some institutional risk control teams are in a low-response state, market depth may decrease, and a single sell order can cause a greater price shock. If this mechanism were replicated to physically deliverable assets like crude oil, the problem would become even more complicated. Perpetual contracts do notA few bullish candles can make the market shout "Altseason is here"... But the money really didn't come.
Have you noticed that things around you have suddenly become lively lately, but the knockoffs you have haven't touched much?
I saw many people getting excited, and Twitter was full of screenshots of "Niu Hui Su Gui" (Ox Return Fast Return). But after carefully scanning the on-chain data, he actually felt even calmer. This isn't a widespread, sweeping rally; it's more like a carefully orchestrated "liquidity flash mob"—funds only dare to cluster around a few strong coins, and the vast majority of tokens struggle even to keep up.
People think what they see is a "full-scale explosion," but in reality, trading is "structural differentiation under the stock game game." The market is quietly repricing: what's worth chasing, and what should be abandoned.
Where is the money going now?
- The most stable is still the anchor $BTC, which is the starting point for all liquidity.
- Then there are $JELLYJELLY, $OPG, $SLX varieties with narrative or bookmaker marks.
- And $LAB, $BSB, $ALLO, $CHIP—all seem to be the 'survivors' who have been screened.
And those that have been forgotten, such as $BEAT, $EDGE, $TRUMP, $VIRTUAL, $IP...... It's not that they're bad, but the market doesn't want to pay attention to them for now. This is the harshness of "event repricing": not all tokens will be evenly priced; only those chosen for "repricing" in the current logic get a share of the pie.
So when is the real Altseason?
- Liquidity has spread from several leading stocks to multiple sectors, not just BTC and Solana rising.
- More altcoins can independently follow their own trends, rather than just following BTC in the tail.
- Trading volume continues to expand, not just a single day's pulse.
- Buying can be sustained, rather than a sudden surge and then exit.
It now seems none of these conditions have been met. So don't rush to bet all your positions. Chasing bullish candles is the easiest way to get stuck halfway up the mountain before liquidity spreads.
My judgment is: the market is still in the "tentative pricing" phase; a true comprehensive rally needs to wait for BTC to hold firm first, then wait for new narratives to pull funds from "safe haven" back to "risky."
Think carefully before taking action; don't let emotions lead you astray.
(The above is for personal observation only and does not constitute any trade advice.) ）
$BTC $ETH $SOL $DOGE #Crypto #Altseason #MarketStructureObjectively speaking
$DOGE As a long-established MEME, its token structure is relatively transparent, with no unlocking pressure, which is an advantage
But the disadvantages are equally obvious:
The trend heavily depends on BTC linkage, with intense technical selling pressure above and continuous issuance of diluted value in the perpetual market
Currently, there is a lack of endogenous growth momentum, and the market is mostly short-term pulse market driven by news
Before incremental funds enter, it is difficult to break out of an independent trend. Strategically, it is more suitable for short-term gaming, and long-term allocation offers low cost-effectiveness#韩国存储双雄获AI双巨头大单
The story of storage is completely told.
A new round of collapse in South Korea may be imminent.
Yesterday, on July 25, Samsung and SK Hynix signed a chip partnership agreement worth 1,375 trillion Korean won with American tech giants.
About $940 billion, which is 6.3 trillion RMB.
Over the weekend, many financial bloggers and investors said this news is a major positive.
But in fact, this is a replay of the Plaza Accord in Japan, and South Korea is bound to repeat Japan's mistakes from the 1990s.
First, originally Samsung and SK Hynix's monthly HBM capacity by the end of 2027 was 130,000 units.
But with this investment agreement and cooperation framework plan, by the end of 2027 their monthly HBM capacity will increase to 190,000 units.
The original supply shortage of HBM was expected to last until the end of 2028, but now it will be directly advanced to the end of 2027, shortening the entire industry's boom cycle by a year.
International capital of trillions will not wait until supply and demand balance at the end of 2027 to act; they usually move one to one and a half years earlier.
Second, this agreement is only a supply intention, not a rigid purchase contract.
However, Samsung and SK Hynix must now start expanding factories, investing in equipment, and begin large-scale capacity expansion.
If the commercialization and profit speed of these big companies led by Google, Microsoft, and Amazon falls behind their investment speed in AI,
they will reduce this expenditure, and the HBM capacity that Samsung and Hynix build in the future will quickly become excess capacity.
Prices will plummet, massive investments will be unrecoverable, and South Korea will face huge corporate losses, export collapse, currency depreciation, and asset price crashes.
A perfect replication of Japan's 1990s script.
So, South Korea seems to have gained the AI order dividend.
But extending the timeline, this cooperation agreement directly locks South Korea's high-end industry future development path.
The entire economic lifeline of South Korea is now completely in the hands of the Americans. Reading the news about Samsung and SK Hynix, I saw a set of numbers that made me a bit restless.
Samsung and SK Group just signed a $950 billion long-term chip supply agreement with US tech giants, valid until 2030. NVIDIA, Broadcom, and Google have all locked in South Korean memory production capacity.
My impression of memory chips was still stuck in the cyclical stock phase. But 65% of SK Hynix's revenue now comes from HBM high-bandwidth memory, a single category, and last month it just raised $26.5 billion in an IPO on Nasdaq, setting a record in the semiconductor industry.
The signal behind this is very direct: US tech giants are locking in capacity in advance according to the AI computing power growth curve for the next 5 to 10 years; short-term fluctuations do not affect decisions at this level.
The structural change in the HBM line is just beginning. Micron, SK Hynix ADR, Samsung—the memory sector deserves to be revalued.
The above does not constitute investment advice; please make judgments based on your own research. A stablecoin claiming to be backed by Bitcoin assets saw its price plummet 99% after the attacker stole about $1 million in collateral. This incident once again proves that the most dangerous moments for stablecoins are often not "no assets," but the system mistaking the wrong price for the truth. On July 22, Balance Coin (BLC) was attacked by oracles. Public reports show that the attacker entered abnormal Bitcoin prices into the lending system, triggering erroneous liquidations and withdrawing about $910,000 to $1 million in assets from the relevant vaults. BLC then fell from nearly $1 to nearly zero. ## "Collateral" does not mean "collateral can be redeemed at any time" Whether a stablecoin can hold its peg depends on at least three layers of structure: The first layer is assets. Is there really enough collateral in the vault? The second layer is pricing. What price does the protocol use to determine collateralization ratio, minting quota, and liquidation threshold? The third layer is liquidity. Even if the book assets are sufficient, during market panic, is anyone willing to accept at prices close to $1? The problem with balance mainly lies in the second layer. The oracle acts like the "eyes" of on-chain protocols; the contract itself does not determine Bitcoin's actual value and only mechanically executes external prices. If input prices are manipulated, subsequent lending, liquidation, and asset transfers will become correct code execution errors. This is why an attack of about $1 million can cause a 99% price drop. According to public data, before the incident, BLC had about 3.5 million tokens in circulation and a nominal market value of about 3I think Jensen Huang's support for opening up weights this time actually has very practical business logic behind it.
The more active the open-source ecosystem is, the more companies involved in AI development and deployment, and the greater the demand for computing power. For NVIDIA, more models being used mean more training and inference scenarios, naturally driving demand for GPUs and data centers.
So this is not just an expression of industry opinions, but also closely tied to NVIDIA's own interests.
If the AI ecosystem becomes excessively closed in the future, with only a few companies controlling the model entry points, the overall market expansion speed may be limited. Conversely, if the open approach encourages more enterprises and developers to participate, it could actually expand the entire AI infrastructure market.
Of course, the market ultimately looks at performance deliveries, not just on philosophy. Whether open source can truly translate into greater computing power needs still requires further data verification.
#黄仁勋首推开源AI公开信, it has received endorsement from industry collectives
$GOOGL In less than 24 hours, before the verdict was even finished, the appeal was submitted. This is faster than the $BTC pump. Kalshi was really anxious this time. A New York federal judge had just rejected their application to block the enforcement of the state's gambling law, and he went straight to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. The target is a sports event contract; state regulators say it's gambling, but Kalshi says it's not. But the judge was not convinced. I stared at the market for a long time; predicting this market track is really too difficult. Whether it's Polymarket or Kalshi, doing prediction markets in the US is like walking a tightrope: the federal government says it's okay, but the states say no. The two sides are fighting, with the project side caught in the middle. Don't panic, this isn't a death sentence. If the Court of Appeal changes its ruling, Kalshi will still have a breather. Sports event contracts are their main source of income, and having this cut off is as painful as losing $ETH to the mainnet. There wasn't much major volatility in the market today, $BTC is still fluctuating. At this level, no one dares to bet on the direction with large positions. To be honest, this kind of regulatory negative impact has limited short-term impact on prices, but it gradually erodes market makers' confidence. Think about it, which institution would be willing to invest heavily in liquidity in a market that could be labeled as gambling at any moment? Sports prediction has been a hot topic lately. The European Championship, Champions League final, and NBA Finals are happening one after another, and the trading volume in the on-chain prediction market has been soaring. But regulators have directly cut the root cause. I think there's no shortcut to compliance. Whoever first sorts out relationships with a certain institution will survive until #芯片股反弹, and short positions in the US stock market will hit a record high #Just now, $KAITO surged. Recently, its performance has been quite impressive, showing a continuous upward trend. From the end of June until now, it has tripled in less than a month, and everything looks thriving. But is this really the case? Is the market really that optimistic about it? To answer these two questions, we need to analyze some data to find the answers. —————————————————— Let's look at its contract data. A closer look at the chart reveals four key time nodes. The first date is July 8. At that time, $KAITO's price suddenly surged, and its contract open interest surged, but the long-short ratio of contracts plummeted. What does this mean? This indicates that this rally has led to a massive amount of short positions. This is the first large-scale short selling in $KAITO in nearly a month. This time, the result was a pullback for $KAITO. The second milestone is July 14. At that time, the price of $KAITO surged again, attracting many more short sellers. The data performance was exactly the same as the first time, and the result was the same. The third date is July 17. At this point, $KAITO started to surge again, and the math performance was the same as the first time. The result was the same, $KAITO pulled back again. The fourth date is July 19. On that day, $KAITO started to rally upward, then went on to a consolidation