SuperEx_Media

Over more than a decade of evolution in the crypto market, we’ve witnessed the decentralization of the “financial world”: Bitcoin brought borderless value consensus; DeFi built a disintermediated financial order; NFT, GameFi, and SocialFi have sought to redefine digital identity, entertainment, and social interaction. Yet the entire stage has remained within the dimension of the “virtual world.” DePIN (Decentralized Physical Infrastructure Networks) is redefining that boundary. For the first time in crypto, it enables physical infrastructure in the real world to adopt blockchain logic: openness, verifiability, co-building, co-governance, and sharing. It is no longer merely an extension of “putting compute on-chain,” but a systemic transformation around “who controls real-world resources.” From electricity, storage, and bandwidth to drone networks, urban sensors, and geospatial data, DePIN represents the true fusion of reality and crypto. In other words: if Bitcoin is decentralized “digital gold,” then DePIN is the decentralized “digital power grid.” SuperEx Education Series: DePIN-When the Real World Goes On-Chain, Infrastructure Enters a… Over more than a decade of evolution in the crypto market, we've witnessed the decentralization of the "financial…news.superex.com The Essence of DePIN: A Revolution in Decentralized Physical Networks At its core, DePIN uses blockchain incentives to mobilize globally distributed individual or enterprise nodes to jointly build and maintain real-world infrastructure networks. It changes the old model of “centralized companies invest, users passively consume” and instead lets users become infrastructure providers and participants in returns. This means three things: Capital structures are decentralized Traditional networks (e.g., telecom, cloud computing, charging stations) rely on capital-intensive, approval-heavy centralized build-outs. DePIN, via token models, lets anyone become a contributing node. Costs are fragmented; power is dispersed. Trust structures are rebuilt Nodes earn rewards through on-chain proofs (e.g., proof of work performed, contribution scores, location verification). The verification logic is open and transparent — trust no longer hinges on institutions. Value distribution is rewritten In the traditional economy, Amazon, Google, Tesla, and others monopolize infrastructure and data flows. In DePIN, value flows directly back to node participants, forming a new “users-as-shareholders” ecosystem economy. In a sentence: DePIN applies Web3’s incentive model to the physical world. Compute, Energy, Bandwidth, Data: The Four Real-World Interfaces of DePIN DePIN isn’t a concept — it’s a class of applications already landing. Its real-world interfaces are mainly concentrated in four directions: 1. Compute DePIN Representative projects: Render, Akash, IO.net, Bittensor. Centered on “AI compute,” these projects aggregate globally distributed GPU resources, scheduling and settling via blockchain. In an era of AI compute scarcity, they’ve become a new class of decentralized data centers. The logic is: Compute providers connect and contribute GPUs; Demand-side (AI developers, model trainers) pay for compute with tokens; The blockchain performs transparent settlement, reputation scoring, and incentive distribution. Render Network is a typical example. Artists upload rendering tasks; the network automatically assigns them to global GPU nodes; nodes receive RNDR tokens upon completion. The result — Render has become the world’s largest distributed GPU rendering network: no central servers, yet more efficient than centralized platforms. 2. Storage DePIN Representative projects: Filecoin, Arweave, Storj. These networks source storage from community nodes and ensure data authenticity and persistence via cryptographic verification. Filecoin incentivizes “hard-drive miners”; Arweave focuses on permanent storage — pay once, store forever. Against the backdrop of exploding AI model data, decentralized storage has become the shared foundational layer for AI and Web3. 3. Network DePIN Representative projects: Helium, Pollen Mobile, RightMesh. They turn telecom infrastructure — Wi-Fi hotspots, 5G small cells — into open community nodes. For example, Helium incentivizes users to deploy hotspots with HNT tokens, building the world’s largest IoT wireless network. This implies that future urban communications may no longer be monopolized by telecom giants but composed of tens of thousands of personal devices. 4. Energy & Sensor DePIN This is the most promising — and most disruptive — direction within DePIN. It enables real physical actions like electricity distribution, sensor data capture, and drone monitoring to carry on-chain verification and token incentives. Imagine: EV charging piles, home solar panels, and weather sensors — each can become a revenue-generating node, participating in infrastructure yield distribution via cryptoeconomics. This is DePIN’s real-world ambition. The Fusion of AI and DePIN: From Compute Scarcity to Node Autonomy The convergence of AI and DePIN is one of 2025’s largest industry narratives. Over the past year, the surge of AI models created massive demand for compute, data, and storage, while centralized cloud resources remained limited and costly. DePIN offers another path: distributed compute autonomy. For example: Bittensor (TAO) enables a decentralized machine learning network where nodes jointly train AI models; Io.net dynamically schedules idle GPU resources, lowering the barrier to AI training; Gensyn seeks to move AI training verification on-chain, making model contributions transparent. In this process, AI is the demand side, and DePIN is the supply side; the two form a new economic closed loop through tokens and on-chain settlement. This isn’t just resource allocation — it’s trust reconstruction: AI’s future may no longer be controlled by OpenAI or NVIDIA, but collaboratively driven by tens of thousands of autonomous nodes. AI needs data, compute, and bandwidth — DePIN happens to provide the decentralized real-world interfaces. From Web2 Infrastructure to Web3 Autonomous Networks If Web2 is “companies build networks, users connect,” then Web3’s DePIN is “users build networks, networks self-govern.” This shift may look like a technical innovation, but it is in fact a revolution in power structures. Take Helium as an example: in traditional telecom models, building a base station requires approvals, licenses, and capital. In Helium, an ordinary user can deploy a device to become a node — providing coverage while earning incentives. This not only lowers construction costs but also distributes network sovereignty to individuals. Similar logic is being replicated across energy, cloud computing, transportation, and more. DePIN is not about “overthrowing governments,” but about making the governance of public resources more transparent, more efficient, and more open. Looking back at fifteen years of blockchain history, each wave has had a central “resource-class asset”: Bitcoin mining is compute power; DeFi is capital liquidity; NFT is digital scarcity; DePIN is the blockchainization of real-world resources. When people no longer “mine” but instead provide bandwidth, energy, data, and compute, the entire crypto economy enters a new phase — the Tokenization of Real Utilities. Nodes are no longer virtual; they physically exist in cities, communities, and homes. Incentives are no longer speculative; they are dividends from real-world production. This is the final form of the crypto economy: Conclusion: As “Reality” Goes On-Chain, Web3 Enters the Physical Era DePIN is not a short-term fad, but a directional leap. It extends blockchain from finance and virtual assets into real-world energy, communications, data, and compute. It reshapes the production logic of economic incentives, social collaboration, and physical infrastructure. We are at a critical inflection point: for the first time, blockchain is not just the ledger of the virtual world, but the operating system of the real world. This is not a fantasy — it’s a beginning. Over the next decade, DePIN will become the real-world conduit connecting AI, energy, IoT, and the crypto economy. Every node, every device, every kilowatt-hour, every unit of compute may become part of the blockchain economy. This is the meaning of DePIN — decentralization is no longer a concept on a screen, but the infrastructure of reality. Let the real world become the blockchain’s mining field. Appendix: DePIN Glossary of Professional Terms DePIN (Decentralized Physical Infrastructure Network) A decentralized physical infrastructure network. Uses blockchain incentives to enable distributed nodes to jointly build and maintain real-world resources such as compute, bandwidth, and electricity. Proof of Location (PoL) A location-proof mechanism used to verify that a node truly provides services at its claimed position, preventing spoofing or fraudulent deployment. Edge Node A node at the network edge, close to end users, typically providing compute, storage, or bandwidth to improve speed and coverage. Token Incentive Model The core economic mechanism of DePIN. Token rewards drive individuals or devices to participate in network build-out, enabling spontaneous resource distribution. Resource Tokenization Mapping physical resources (e.g., electricity, storage space, network bandwidth) to on-chain assets for trading or staking. Hardware Mining Earning tokens by contributing real hardware resources (e.g., Wi-Fi hotspots, GPU compute, sensor data) to co-build the network. Network Coverage Proof Used to verify whether a node truly provides network coverage or a service area, common in decentralized communications DePIN projects. Decentralized Compute Network A system that aggregates idle GPU/CPU resources worldwide to provide services for AI, rendering, or scientific computing. Data Oracle Layer The middleware that securely transports real-world data (e.g., geospatial, climate, electricity consumption) onto the blockchain. Micro-Infrastructure Economy A distributed economic form enabled by DePIN in which individuals earn by contributing micro-resources. Dynamic Pricing Protocol A smart-contract mechanism that automatically adjusts resource prices based on supply and demand to keep incentives aligned with market value. Real-World Work Proof Unlike traditional PoW’s virtual hashing, this emphasizes verifiable physical contributions (e.g., uploading sensor data, providing network coverage). DePIN DAO A DAO that manages DePIN governance, incentives, and upgrades, enabling community-driven evolution. Sensor Network Layer The foundational layer in DePIN for collecting real-world data, including air quality, traffic flow, temperature, and energy consumption. Token Utility Loop A complete in-ecosystem usage loop — payment, staking, governance, and incentives — to prevent “mine-dump-sell” model failures. Hybrid DePIN Projects that balance on-chain governance with real-world regulatory requirements, preserving open incentives while complying with national laws. Network Reliability Score A composite metric of node service quality, activity, latency, and geographic stability used to weight incentive allocation. Off-chain Validation Verifying some physical actions off-chain and reporting results on-chain via cryptographic signatures to reduce gas costs and latency. Resource Leasing Protocol Smart contracts that allow short-term leasing of others’ node resources (e.g., GPU or hotspot), enabling flexible sharing economies. Decentralized Infrastructure Index A composite index tracking token performance and network metrics of key DePIN projects, used to gauge overall industry development.

#Binance # OKX #Bybit The agency model has long proven to be one of the most effective growth strategies. Especially in the fiercely competitive world of crypto exchanges, the “Exchange Ambassador Program” has evolved far beyond a simple marketing tactic — it has become a battle for ecosystem dominance. Whoever can attract more community leaders, content creators, and professional traders will gain control of the global user gateway. Over the past few years, from Binance, OKX, and SuperEx to Bybit, nearly every exchange has launched its own ambassador program. On the surface, they all offer “commissions, airdrops, and bonuses,” but underneath lies each platform’s distinct understanding of the Web3 growth model. In this article, we’ll take an in-depth look at the promotion mechanisms of major exchanges. If you want to become a crypto KOL or exchange ambassador, how should you choose the right platform? Why Are Exchanges Competing for “Ambassadors”? In the traditional Web2 world, platforms gained users through advertising and influencer marketing. But in Web3, ad performance is limited and trust is harder to build. Therefore, exchanges have begun to use token incentives + community co-building to reshape their growth logic. Becoming a “promotion ambassador” isn’t just about earning commissions — it’s about becoming an ecosystem node of the exchange, a decentralized growth interface that bridges users and platforms. For exchanges, ambassador programs create three key advantages: Rapid user acquisition: Leverage social trust networks for precise growth. Reduced marketing costs: Convert ad budgets into commission incentives. Co-built brand influence: Let real users speak for the brand instead of marketing teams. That explains why Binance, OKX, Bybit, Gate, and SuperEx have all doubled down on KOL programs between 2024–2025 — before the next bull market arrives, whoever controls the most “social nodes” will control the future flow of users. Analysis of Major Exchange Ambassador Programs: Who’s More Friendly? 1. Binance Affiliate Program — The Giant’s “Elite System” Binance’s ambassador program is one of the earliest in the industry. Its main advantages lie in brand credibility and stable commission structure, though it has high entry barriers. Commission rate: Up to 50% for spot, 40% for futures. Application criteria: Qualified creators/media outlets with active content channels (details not explicitly stated). Support system: Exclusive online/offline events, Blockchain Week participation, affiliate bootcamps, content co-creation. Drawbacks: Difficult to level up, long reward cycles, not beginner-friendly. Binance’s philosophy is clear: it doesn’t chase “quantity” but focuses on cultivating selected partners. Thus, it’s ideal for established content creators or large trading community leaders — but less accessible for new KOLs. 2. OKX Affiliate Program — Resource-Rich but Highly Competitive OKX upgraded its ambassador system in 2024, highlighting multi-tiered commissions and multilingual content support. Commission rate: Up to 50%. Benefits: Official event collaborations, co-branded activities, cashback promotions. Community support: Marketing materials and regional operation resources provided. Drawbacks: Oversaturated competition and uneven resource distribution. OKX is particularly strong at building regional influence, with localized KOL programs across Southeast Asia and Latin America. However, due to market saturation, many newcomers find it difficult to grow. The program leans toward commercial brand partnerships rather than long-term personal growth for independent KOLs. 3. Bybit Affiliate — High Commission but Complex Mechanism Bybit’s affiliate program is often dubbed the “King of High Commissions.” Its structure is flexible but also complex and demanding. Commission rate: Up to 50%. Bonus system: Rewards based on both trading volume and the number of invites. Drawbacks: Delayed commission updates and regional restrictions. Special perks: Extra rewards for community contributions (Spaces, events, memberships). Bybit’s commission structure is indeed generous, but it functions more like a professional agency system — requiring ambassadors to demonstrate recruiting ability and event management experience. For ordinary creators, it can be challenging to maintain performance over time. 4. SuperEx KOL Ambassador — A Web3-Era Growth Ecosystem While most exchanges still treat “promotion = user acquisition,” SuperEx has taken a fundamentally different approach — one rooted in ecosystem co-building. As the world’s first Web3-based exchange, SuperEx has embraced community autonomy, DAO governance, and user incentive models since its inception. Its Global KOL Ambassador Program is not just a commission channel — it’s an identity framework within the ecosystem. (1) After Becoming a SuperEx KOL Ambassador, You’ll Receive: High commission rates: Among the highest in the industry — up to 50%–70% of transaction fees. Community support: Professional traffic guidance, event planning, and content resources to expand your influence easily. Brand empowerment: Access to global offline events and co-branded merchandise — enhancing your community’s credibility and appeal. Simply put, KOL ambassadors aren’t just agents — they are the “seed promoters” and “community navigators” of SuperEx’s global expansion. (2) Requirements & Process to Join SuperEx KOL Ambassador Unlike traditional programs, SuperEx has clear selection criteria to ensure community quality and engagement: Basic requirements: Community-building experience: Ability to create and manage active crypto groups. Crypto knowledge: Understanding of digital assets and blockchain trends. Active participation: Willingness to maintain and engage community discussions. Additionally, you must meet at least one of the following: Social media KOL: 100+ followers on platforms like YouTube, Twitter, or Facebook. Community owner: 500+ members in Telegram, Discord, or similar platforms. Crypto community participant: Active in 5 or more crypto-related groups. Community management experience: Prior online/offline management background. Application steps: Submit the application form: Complete the KOL ambassador form and wait for official review. 👉 https://www.superex.com/agentSystem/agentForm Generate an invitation link: Once approved, you’ll receive a personal referral link to track user registrations. Start earning commissions: Whenever users register and trade via your link, you automatically earn rebates. The entire process is efficient and transparent, allowing ambassadors to monitor their performance and maximize long-term value. 5. Gate.io, KuCoin, Bitget, and Others — Flexible but Short-Term These mid-tier exchanges offer more flexible KOL programs with lower entry barriers, but their reward systems often follow a “high early bonus, low long-term reward” pattern. Pros: Quick approval and easy onboarding. Cons: Limited traffic support and weak sustainability. Typical model: Short-term events tied to airdrop campaigns. Such platforms are suitable for creators who want to experiment quickly, but not for those seeking sustainable growth, as they lack long-term resource support and brand accumulation mechanisms. Industry Insight: From “Referral” to “Community Autonomy” By 2025, the ambassador competition has entered its second phase — evolving from pure commission rivalry to ecosystem ownership competition. The most successful ambassador programs of the future will embody three key traits: Collaborative branding: Platforms and KOLs co-create content and events, not just promote. Multi-layered income: Integrating commissions, governance, NFT rights, and DAO dividends. On-chain identity: Every ambassador’s contribution recorded on-chain, forming verifiable reputation assets. Currently, only SuperEx has fully implemented a system designed around these three principles — providing ambassadors with a growth path, long-term incentives, and on-chain identity. This isn’t just marketing; it’s the prototype of the next-generation Web3 business model. Conclusion: Which Ambassador Program Is Worth Joining in 2025? If you are a crypto content creator, community leader, or professional trader seeking sustainable income and growth through your influence, ask yourself three questions: Does this platform support your long-term development? Is its revenue-sharing model transparent and fair? Does it allow you to truly participate in decision-making? For most people: Binance represents stability, OKX represents resources, Bybit represents flexibility. But if you seek growth, collaboration, and autonomy, the SuperEx Global Ambassador Program may be the answer — one that balances the present and the future.

#PicoPrism #Ethereum In mid-October 2025, a new entrant called Brevis released its “Pico Prism” technology — and the ripple effects across the Ethereum ecosystem have been far from subtle. The announcement caught the attention of the Ethereum Foundation itself, with the official account tweeting:“This is a major step toward Ethereum’s future. ZK technologies like Pico Prism will enable Ethereum to scale to global demand while still remaining trustworthy and decentralized.” Prominent figures in the ecosystem, including Vitalik Buterin and core-developer Justin Drake, likewise lauded the achievement. But beyond the fanfare, what exactly is Pico Prism? Why is it being treated as a potential game-changer? And what are the caveats that merit a more measured view? This article unpacks the technology, its significance for Ethereum’s scalability roadmap, and the open questions that remain. What is Pico Prism? At its core, Pico Prism is a zero-knowledge proof (ZKP)-based system developed by Brevis, designed for “real-time proving” of Ethereum L1 blocks. According to Brevis: In benchmark testing of Ethereum blocks (rated at a 45 M gas limit), Pico Prism achieved 99.6% coverage of blocks proven in under 12 seconds.Specifically, 96.8% of blocks achieved under 10 seconds proving time — a key milestone tied to Ethereum’s roadmap. Average proving time reported was ~6.9 seconds (for 45 M gas blocks), compared with previous benchmarks (e.g., ~10.3 s) using older hardware/architectures. Cost and hardware improvements: while a prior system (Succinct SP1 Hypercube) needed ~160 RTX 4090 GPUs (~US$256 k hardware cost) per cluster, Pico Prism achieved similar or better throughput with just 64 RTX 5090 GPUs (~US$128 k hardware cost) — roughly a 50% cost reduction plus ~3.4× performance improvement when combining speed and cost. In concrete terms: rather than every validator re-executing every transaction in a block (the current model for Ethereum L1), Pico Prism’s model is: one prover generates a ZK proof for the block, and the rest of the network merely verifies that proof — vastly reducing computation for the verifying nodes. Key architectural improvements Multi-machine, multi-GPU pipeline: the proving process has been broken into stages (emulation → recursive proving) and off-loads compute-intensive work to GPUs, leaving setup tasks on CPUs. This modular design enables near-linear scaling across multiple servers. Use of consumer-grade hardware (RTX 5090) rather than costly data-centre-only infrastructure, thereby lowering barriers for validator infrastructure and promoting decentralisation. Why “real-time proving”? Ethereum block time currently sits around ~12 seconds. Real-time proving (RTP) means the proof for a given block is produced in less (or not much more) than that interval — ideally <10 sec — so that proof-based validation can keep up with block production speed. When validated quickly, validators no longer need to re-execute every transaction in the block; they just verify the proof. That has implications for throughput, node hardware requirements, decentralisation, and cost. Why does it matter for Ethereum’s scaling? Ethereum has long straddled the “scalability vs. decentralisation vs. security” trilemma. Its current model (on L1) means every validator must re-run every transaction in every block. As usage grows, this becomes a bottleneck: large block sizes increase hardware demands, limit validator participation (centralisation risk), and keep gas costs high. Pico Prism’s breakthrough is important for the following reasons: 1. Lowering validator hardware barrier → greater decentralisation If validators only need to verify a small ZK proof rather than re-execute entire blocks, their hardware requirements drop dramatically. Brevis argues that nodes could potentially run from much smaller hardware (even home-server or laptop class) rather than large rigs. A more decentralised validator set guards against centralised control and thus improves security/trust. 2. Raising throughput (TPS) potential By shifting from re-execution to proof verification, block production can scale. Ethereum’s roadmap suggests aiming toward ~10,000 TPS (transactions per second) on L1 (post major upgrades like Fusaka/EIP-7825 etc). Pico Prism is cited as one of the technology enablers. 3. Cost reduction & accessibility High gas fees on L1 are in part due to compute intensity and block size limits. If block validation becomes cheaper (via RTP), then higher throughput and lower fees become more feasible. Also the lowering of hardware cost for proving clusters (US$128k vs previous US$256k) makes broader infrastructure deployment economically viable. 4. Enabling richer dApps and ecosystem growth Greater base-layer capacity and lower costs open the door for more complex dApps: DeFi, gaming, real-world assets, cross-chain protocols. It also makes L1 more competitive relative to L2s or alternative chains. Vitalik’s remark underlines this: RTP/ZK integration like Pico Prism are “a major step toward scaling while maintaining trust/decentralisation”. Context: Where does this fit in Ethereum’s roadmap? The Ethereum Foundation’s July 2025 roadmap set explicit goals for real-time proving, ZK-EVM integration, and hardware/cost targets. Key targets included: ≥99 % block coverage under proving targets <10 sec proof time for “most” blocks Hardware cost for proving cluster <US$100 k Power consumption <10 kW (to make home validation feasible) Pico Prism, while not yet hitting all “ideal” targets, has significantly narrowed the gap (96.8% <10 s, cost ~US$128k). It demonstrates progress from research toward production-grade infrastructure. Justin Drake noted that upcoming upgrades (e.g., EIP-7825) will optimise L1 block structure to better support parallel proving/sub-blocks — making technologies like Pico Prism more effective. What are the potential limitations & open questions? While the numbers are compelling, a balanced analysis must consider caveats. 1. Proof-vs-production: Lab vs live The benchmark results (e.g., 6.9 seconds average proof time for 45 M gas blocks) are promising. But they are measured in controlled testing conditions (“ama 1,000 blocks sampled” etc) rather than under full live network conditions where block conditions vary, forks occur, network latency matters, and adversarial conditions apply. 2. Hardware centralisation risk Even though Pico Prism lowered GPU count/cost, it still requires 64 high-end GPUs (RTX 5090) for the benchmark cluster. That means some infrastructure cost and sophistication remains; whether many independent actors will deploy such clusters remains to be seen. If only a few entities can run proving clusters, we could face centralisation of proving capacity (even if verification remains decentralised). 3. Validator economics & incentives Transitioning many validators to “just verifying proofs” instead of full re-execution involves economic incentives, consensus protocol changes, software upgrades, and ecosystem alignment. If the incentives are misaligned (e.g., cheaper hardware but lower rewards) validators may delay adoption. 4. Security risk & trust assumptions ZK proof systems introduce new cryptographic assumptions and complexity. While proving entire Ethereum blocks via ZK is technically viable, the security of the proving system, resilience against bugs, ensuring soundness/completeness, and decentralised upgrading are non-trivial. The network must ensure the prover(s) cannot cheat or collude. 5. Interoperability & ecosystem integration Pico Prism is one piece. For Ethereum’s L1 to fully shift toward proof-based validation, other pieces must align: consensus layer changes, block size/gas re-thinking, client software, network upgrade coordination. Without holistic alignment, the benefit may be delayed. Implications for developers, validators & ecosystem participants For developers dApp builders can look forward to lower base-layer fees and higher throughput options. But they should also monitor how quickly real-time proving solutions like Pico Prism move from testing → production → full node support. Projects targeting L1 might see fewer scalability constraints, but still need to account for transition risk. For validators and infrastructure providers Hardware requirements may drop in the medium term (less need for full re-execution rigs). Opportunity for “light-node” or home-validation becomes more realistic — which could broaden participation and decentralisation. Providers of proving clusters (e.g., Brevis-type infra) may become new infrastructure players; risk of concentration needs monitoring. For ecosystem/governance The shift toward ZK-proof-based validation shifts the paradigm: trust moves from raw compute to cryptographic validity. Governance and audits must adapt. Upgrades like EIP-7825 and roadmap changes will need coordination across clients, protocols, and validators. The economic model of Ethereum (fees, gas, block size) may evolve — fees may drop, but block size/gas limit decisions become more critical. Summing up: Meaning, timing & what to watch Pico Prism is by no means a silver bullet — but it represents a meaningful advance in the push toward Ethereum’s next growth phase. Its achievement — near-10-second proof times, consumer-hardware clusters, cost reduction — crosses several “hard lines” in Ethereum’s scaling challenge. For participants — developers, validators, and investors alike — the takeaway is cautious optimism. The foundation for transformative change is taking shape, but execution, ecosystem alignment and decentralisation still need to be proven in real-world conditions. Real-time proving is not just a technical feat — it’s a critical enabler for Ethereum’s next chapter. Disclaimer: This article is for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute financial advice or a recommendation to invest. The technologies, timelines and performance metrics described are subject to change and depend on many variables.

#EducationSeries #EVM Introduction: Why Understand “Virtual Machines” In the blockchain world, there’s an old saying: “If you don’t understand virtual machines, you can’t understand the soul of smart contracts.” This isn’t an exaggeration — the Virtual Machine (VM) is the heart of blockchain technology. It determines how code runs across the network, how consistency is maintained, and how cheating is prevented. If you know nothing about the EVM (Ethereum Virtual Machine), it’s like owning a supercar without knowing how to shift gears — you may see the numbers, but you’ll never control the true power. This article will guide you from zero to a full understanding of the EVM — how it ensures blockchain security, stability, and predictability in every transaction. What Is a Virtual Machine? Starting from Computer Virtual Machines In traditional computing, a virtual machine is software that simulates a real computer environment. You can run multiple virtual machines on one physical computer, each with its own operating system and resources. The most common example is using a computer to simulate a mobile phone environment — something many users have likely experienced. The advantages are clear: Isolates different programs to avoid interference Simplifies deployment and improves compatibility Allows the same software to run on different hardware 1. Why Does Blockchain Need a Virtual Computing Environment? Blockchain nodes are distributed globally. Every transaction must be executed on all nodes with the exact same result. If each machine’s environment differs, results will diverge — and the network could fork. Thus, the virtual machine provides a standardized and deterministic execution environment: regardless of hardware or OS, as long as the code runs on the same VM, the output will be identical. 2. Blockchain VM vs. Traditional VM Traditional VM: Focuses on resource isolation, compatibility, and security Blockchain VM: Focuses on determinism, verifiability, and immutability The biggest difference: A blockchain VM must produce identical state updates across all nodes, or consensus will fail. The Birth and Core Mission of the EVM There are many blockchain virtual machines — EVM, WASM, SVM, MOVE VM, etc. — but the most famous and influential is the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM), created by Vitalik Buterin in 2015. The EVM was designed to make smart contracts execute on the blockchain like legal agreements written in code. Vitalik once said:“We’re not just building a system for transferring money — we’re making the blockchain into a decentralized computer.” The EVM’s mission can be summarized in three points: Deterministic execution: Every transaction must yield the same result network-wide Secure isolation: Smart contract code runs in a sandbox, preventing harm to the main chain Cross-node compatibility: All nodes can interpret and execute the same bytecode Smart contracts are called “code as law” precisely because they depend on EVM’s execution results as the final judgment. In the EVM, every line of code follows strict rules, consumes a fixed amount of Gas, and changes verifiable state — without third-party interference. How the EVM Works 1. Bytecode, Gas, and the State Machine Bytecode: Machine-readable code compiled from smart contracts Gas: The “fuel” for execution, preventing infinite loops and abuse State Machine: The system maintaining account balances, contract storage, and block data Each transaction in the EVM follows these steps: The node validates transaction legitimacy Executes the smart contract according to its bytecode Consumes Gas and returns results Updates the global blockchain state 2. Core Components: Stack, Memory, Storage Stack: Temporary data storage (LIFO structure) Memory: Runtime temporary storage, dynamically scalable Storage: Permanent on-chain storage; each write consumes Gas Each component is vital to EVM computation: the Stack ensures speed, Memory handles temporary data, and Storage maintains synchronized state across the network. 3. The Full Contract Execution Process For example, in a transfer contract: The user initiates a transaction The node converts it into EVM bytecode The bytecode loads into Stack and Memory Each instruction executes and consumes Gas Storage updates and the new state is broadcast All nodes verify consistency — transaction completed Though complex, this design guarantees determinism and security across the entire Ethereum network. The Gas Mechanism and Security Boundaries 1. Why Must EVM Execution Require Payment? Gas is fundamentally a resource consumption fee — it accounts for: CPU computation Memory read/write Disk storage Without Gas, attackers could endlessly loop smart contracts, crashing the network. 2. The Relationship Between Gas, Computation, and Complexity The more complex the operation, the more Gas it consumes. Writing to Storage costs far more than Memory operations Cross-contract calls stack Gas costs, raising on-chain expenses 3. How Gas Limits Prevent DDoS Attacks Every transaction has a Gas limit. If execution runs out of Gas, the state rolls back — but part of the Gas is still consumed. This ensures: Attackers can’t deplete resources for free Contracts must be optimized for efficiency Network stability is maintained The EVM Ecosystem and the Wave of Compatibility 1. EVM-Compatible Chains Beyond Ethereum mainnet, many blockchains have adopted EVM compatibility: BSC (Binance Smart Chain) Polygon Avalanche Fantom EVM compatibility means developers can deploy the same smart contracts on multiple chains without rewriting code. 2. Why Everyone Chooses “EVM Compatibility” Saves time and lowers the development barrier Leverages existing toolchains like Remix, Truffle, and Hardhat Simplifies cross-chain asset and application migration 3. Cross-Chain Interoperability and EVM Bytecode Standards The standardization of EVM bytecode enables cross-chain bridges and DEX interoperability. As long as developers follow the EVM specification, their contracts can operate across multiple chains — greatly enhancing the vitality of the ecosystem. EVM’s Limitations and the Rise of Next-Generation Virtual Machines 1. Performance Bottlenecks Single-threaded execution limits throughput Global state synchronization restricts scalability High Gas costs make on-chain operations expensive 2. Challenges from New Virtual Machines WASM (WebAssembly): Multi-language support, higher performance SVM (Solana VM): Parallel transaction processing for higher throughput Move VM (Diem/Aptos): Secure type system preventing fund vulnerabilities 3. EVM 2.0 and zkEVM EVM 2.0: Aims to boost performance and reduce Gas consumption zkEVM: Integrates zero-knowledge proofs for privacy and verifiable computation These innovations seek to preserve EVM’s ecosystem advantages while addressing its performance and security limits. Appendix: Glossary of Virtual Machine Terms VM (Virtual Machine): Software simulation of a computer environment for isolated program execution. EVM (Ethereum Virtual Machine): The execution engine of the Ethereum network that runs smart contracts. Gas: A unit measuring the computational cost of executing smart contracts, preventing resource abuse. Bytecode: Machine-readable code compiled from a smart contract’s source code. Opcode: Instruction set within bytecode that tells the EVM what operations to perform. Stack: A temporary data area following the Last-In-First-Out (LIFO) principle. Memory: Temporary, expandable runtime storage during contract execution. Storage: Permanent on-chain storage preserving contract states. State: The collective data of all account balances and contract storage. Transaction: An operation that transfers assets or invokes a smart contract on the blockchain. Contract (Smart Contract): Self-executing, immutable code agreement. Node: A computer maintaining the blockchain ledger and executing EVM calculations. Consensus: The mechanism ensuring all nodes agree on the same blockchain state. Fork: A situation where the blockchain diverges into multiple possible chains. WASM (WebAssembly): A high-performance, multi-language virtual machine standard. zkEVM: An EVM variant integrating zero-knowledge proofs for privacy and verifiability. SVM (Solana Virtual Machine): Solana’s high-throughput parallel execution environment. Move VM: A secure VM designed for the Move language, used by Aptos and Diem chains. Cross-chain: Mechanisms enabling asset and data exchange between blockchains. Deterministic Execution: The property ensuring identical inputs produce identical outputs on all nodes. Conclusion: The EVM Is More Than a Machine — It’s a Consensus The EVM may appear to be just a virtual machine, but it embodies the trust, determinism, and security of smart contracts. In the future blockchain world — be it DeFi, NFTs, or cross-chain ecosystems — virtual machine technology will remain indispensable. To understand the EVM is to understand the core logic of blockchain: how digital assets flow securely through a global network. The SuperEx Education Series aims to help you grasp these fundamental concepts — so you won’t just see numbers, but understand the powerful mechanisms behind them.

#IEO #ICO 2019: IEO (Initial Exchange Offering) burst onto the scene as a “bear-market lifeline.” 2021: With the rise of DeFi and IDO, it was briefly dismissed as “outdated.” 2025: IEOs are quietly making a comeback. Why? Because at cyclical bottoms, capital returns to certainty. In a world where regulation, trust, and risk have been redefined, IEOs have re-emerged as the “bridge” between project financing and user participation. But this is no longer the free-for-all era where “anyone could issue and everyone aped in” — it has become a more precise and systematized capital game. We’ll first review the basics: ICO / IEO 1. What is an ICO? The “Crowdfunding 1.0” of Crypto ICO stands for Initial Coin Offering. Imagine a blockchain project — for example, decentralized cloud storage. The team writes a white paper explaining its vision, technical roadmap, and future plans, then issues a token, say “ABCD.” Investors can purchase these tokens with BTC or ETH, and the project secures its seed capital. That’s an ICO. It sounds a bit like an IPO (Initial Public Offering), right? But the differences are: IPOs have regulation, audits, and a legal framework; ICOs were virtually permissionless: no corporate entity, no compliance audit. In the 2017 bull market, ICOs became one of the hottest financing methods. That year, 800+ projects raised over $6 billion via ICOs. New coins launched daily; many early buyers doubled within days. But the same openness that fueled innovation also invited bad actors. Plenty of projects had no product or code; white papers were copy-pasted; funds were raised and then vanished. By 2018, statistics showed that over 80% of ICO projects failed or disappeared. Regulators stepped in. The U.S. SEC, Korea’s FSC, the PBOC, and others flagged ICOs as posing illegal fundraising risks. ICOs subsequently exited the mainstream stage. 2. What is an IEO? The Exchange-Led “Crowdfunding 2.0” The ICO chaos demanded a middleman to re-establish trust — hence the IEO (Initial Exchange Offering). In simple terms: ICO: the project issues the token itself; IEO: the exchange helps the project issue the token. For example, Project A wants to issue a token and partners with an exchange. The exchange audits, screens, and promotes the project, then opens a subscription on its own platform. Users purchase the token directly on the exchange, completing the entire process there. Example: SuperEx launched Super Start, which meaningfully contributed to the IEO revival. Thanks to strict vetting, most listings achieved 100%+ of expected results. In recent years, OKX, Huobi, Gate, and others have also rolled out Launchpad platforms. The essence of IEO is that the exchange endorses the project, enhancing credibility. Investors are no longer wiring funds to unknown wallets; they participate on familiar platforms with higher security and traceability. Where Do IEOs Shine? An IEO is an exchange-led financing method where the platform helps the project issue tokens. Users don’t pay the project directly; they participate via the exchange. It may sound like just another “intermediary,” but the impact is substantial: safer, more transparent issuance. 1. Much Higher Security The biggest selling point: IEOs are far safer than ICOs. In the ICO era, you might see a slick white paper and a website, then send funds to a random wallet — only for the team to disappear overnight. IEOs work differently: Exchange due diligence: team background, financials, code security, legal compliance, etc. KYC: users verify identity to prevent money laundering and illegal fundraising. Funds remain on the exchange; issuance and distribution are executed by the platform’s systems, transparently recorded. This means users don’t face “disappearing act” risk. Even if a project underperforms, the exchange stands as a responsible counterparty, filtering a layer of risk. 2. Instant Liquidity Another reason IEOs are popular: you can trade immediately after purchase. With ICOs, investors often waited months for an exchange listing — during which volatility could crush sentiment and lead to instant “list-and-dump.” IEOs fix this: Tokens list immediately after the sale; Users can trade, sell, or hold right away. This “issue-and-list” mechanism makes IEOs akin to IPO subscriptions: low barriers, fast circulation, higher price transparency. Crucially, the model bootstraps liquidity and attention — everyone knows the exchange’s traffic spikes on listing day. 3. Brand Endorsement & Exposure Dividends In crypto, an exchange’s brand functions as soft credit. If a project runs an IEO on a top exchange, it implies it has passed multiple screening layers. For projects, this is marketing in itself: The exchange helps with announcements, news, and AMAs; Built-in access to a user base in the millions; Easier trust and heat from investors. Bottom line: the core of IEO is not financing — it’s trust transfer. 2017 ICOs — story-driven inflows; 2020 IDOs — liquidity mining drove attention; 2025 IEOs — compliance and safety win trust. In the past, users trusted projects; today, users entrust exchanges. Exchanges become the new “credit guarantors”: Verifying authenticity; Handling issuance, custody, and settlement; Providing initial liquidity and exposure. Implication: The success of an IEO is 80% determined by the exchange’s quality — which makes “how to choose an exchange” the central question for both investors and projects. How to Choose an IEO Exchange Primary Factor: Strictness of the Review Process In the IEO market, the worst outcome isn’t losing money — it’s getting scammed. Many so-called “IEO platforms” are fundraising schemes dressed up as launchpads, with “reviews” that exist only on slides. So the first criterion matters most: Does the exchange conduct real due diligence? Top platforms typically include: Verifying the project’s registration, team identity, and source of funds; Reviewing tokenomics; Authenticating the technical white paper; Assessing community activity and TAM; Signing legal compliance documents (e.g., SAFT, KYC/KYB). On this front, IEO sections on mainstream platforms such as Binance Launchpad, OKX Jumpstart, and Super Start clearly enjoy higher credibility. Second Factor: Liquidity & User Coverage An IEO’s success hinges on liquidity. Even great projects die as “zombie coins” if no one trades them. Evaluate liquidity via three lenses: 1）Average daily volume & market depth Binance, OKX, and Bybit are global leaders; SuperEx is also a frequent top-10 (CMC) exchange by average daily spot depth and volume. 2）User composition Some platforms are dominated by short-term speculators; Others focus on long-term holders and DAO communities. Choose an exchange that matches your audience. SuperEx has 10M+ registered users, 600k+ social followers, coverage in 166 countries/regions, and operates one of the largest DAOs — SuperEx DAO, with real power-devolution across 20+ countries/regions. 3）Secondary-market relay capacity Good IEO platforms open spot, perps, or liquidity pools right after listing — significantly strengthening price support and post-listing momentum. Third Factor: Tokenomics Compatibility Exchanges differ widely in their tolerance and preferences for token models. For example: Binance Launchpad prefers strong deflation + utility designs; OKX Jumpstart leans toward on-chain ecosystems or gaming; Bybit Launchpad emphasizes user participation; SuperEx applies holistic, full-spectrum project assessment to ensure reliability and high value. An IEO is not just a “listing” — it’s ecosystem grafting. Don’t just consider the platform’s size; consider whether its “soil” suits your project. SuperEx’s IEO Platform: Super Start As the world’s first crypto exchange built on Web 3.0, SuperEx is committed to an open, transparent, decentralized Web3 ecosystem, spanning finance, commerce, education, and DAO. Among its most watched pillars is the IEO launch platform — Super Start. 1) About Super Start Super Start is a tailor-made IEO channel for high-quality, high-potential projects, designed to provide faster listings and financing, while giving global users more early access to high-growth opportunities. Backed by SuperEx’s massive user base and global influence, Super Start delivers tens of millions of impressions, quickly pushes projects into the spotlight, and generates powerful brand effects. 2) Core Advantages of Super Start For Project Teams: Fast-track listing: streamlined process, accelerated go-to-market, faster access to global investors. Comprehensive exposure: multi-faceted display and promotion via SuperEx to boost brand awareness. Massive traffic: leverage SuperEx’s global user base for maximum visibility and attention. High participation rates: vibrant communities and strong investment atmosphere help projects outperform financing expectations. For Users: More early-stage access: participate directly in early issuance of potential projects and capture higher growth upside. Transparent project info: clear disclosures on project details, team background, and tokenomics reduce information asymmetry. Precise project screening: SuperEx’s strict review process ensures safety, compliance, and credibility. In a maturing crypto market, IEOs are reshaping Web3 financing by reconnecting quality projects with global users. SuperEx Super Start is not just an IEO platform — it’s a global crypto “launch accelerator” that helps innovation break out faster and helps investors meet the future earlier. Conclusion: IEO’s “Second Spring” Belongs to an Era of Trust Reanchoring The rebirth of IEOs doesn’t mean a return to the old playbook — it signals a reconstruction of trust. When users no longer blindly chase pumps; When project teams stop relying on hype; When exchanges are willing to return power to communities — that’s when the market truly matures. IEOs in 2025 represent a post-bubble rebuild. They’re no longer just financing tools, but a continuation of a trust experiment. And every participant is both a witness and a co-builder.

#Stablecoin #Circle #Ripple If 2021–2023 was the era of expansion for stablecoins, then post-2025 marks the era of belonging — belonging to a regulatory framework, a trust structure, a jurisdictional system. This is precisely why every major stablecoin issuer is now competing for one credential: the U.S. National Trust Bank Charter. From Regulatory Gray Zones to Institutional Legitimacy Following two landmark policy signals from the OCC (Office of the Comptroller of the Currency) in March and August 2025, the regulatory landscape shifted dramatically: Federal banks and savings associations are now authorized to engage in crypto asset custody, limited stablecoin issuance, and independent node validation. Community banks are encouraged to collaborate with crypto firms to co-develop financial products. This was not a “loosening” of policy — it was an institutional invitation. The OCC effectively opened a legal gateway to crypto banking: if you operate within the rules, the U.S. can recognize you as a bank. Circle Leads the Charge: From USDC to the “National Digital Currency Bank” Among all players, Circle made the boldest and most symbolic move. On June 30, 2025, it formally filed with the OCC to create “First National Digital Currency Bank, N.A.” This would be a digital asset bank — not accepting cash deposits or offering loans, but authorized to custody crypto assets and manage USDC reserves on behalf of institutional clients. This move redefines what a stablecoin issuer is. Previously, issuers were merely technical intermediaries: issuing tokens, managing reserves, and relying on the traditional banking system. Now, Circle seeks to become the banking node itself. That means: USDC reserves will be custodied by Circle’s own trust structure, not by partner banks. Trust management shifts from outsourced confidence to internal sovereignty. It also lays the foundation for Circle’s future in stock and bond custody. As CEO Jeremy Allaire put it:“We’re not trying to become a bank — we’re trying to make it safe for institutions to use digital dollars under a regulated framework.” That statement hits the core of this transformation: for a decade, crypto firms tried to avoid regulation; post-2025, they are competing to embrace it. Ripple: Bringing Stablecoins Into the Fed’s Master Account Long known for regulatory friction, Ripple has always excelled at navigating legal gray zones. On July 3, CEO Brad Garlinghouse confirmed on X that Ripple is applying for a National Trust Bank Charter and pursuing Federal Reserve Master Account access. This is a far more profound move than it appears. If approved, Ripple would not only custody reserves for its stablecoin RLUSD, but also gain direct access to the Fed’s payment system. That would make RLUSD not just an on-chain dollar, but a “dollar shadow” within the federal clearing network. Garlinghouse called this “a new benchmark for stablecoin trust” — in other words, he aims to make stablecoins bank-grade financial products. Strategically, Ripple’s goal isn’t merely to issue RLUSD — it’s to rebuild the cross-border settlement layer, creating a “bank-grade SWIFT” powered by crypto. If Circle is building the payment layer of the digital dollar, Ripple aims to build the settlement layer. Paxos and Coinbase: Rebuilding the Trust Architecture Paxos’ story feels like a homecoming. It had already received conditional OCC approval in 2020 but lost it in 2023 due to procedural lapses. Now, it’s reapplying — clearly intent on re-entering the mainstream regulatory framework. For Paxos, trust trumps innovation. After its experience with Binance’s BUSD, it learned the cost of regulatory friction. A National Trust Charter would free it from New York State’s limited jurisdiction and allow nationwide clearing operations. Coinbase, on the other hand, approaches this as strategic positioning. Already holding a digital asset custody license, Coinbase’s trust bank application isn’t about becoming a traditional bank — it’s about streamlining institutional settlement. VP Greg Tusar said this will enable Coinbase to “innovate continuously within a clear regulatory perimeter.” In essence, Coinbase is evolving from a trading platform to a regulated financial services conglomerate, building the legal foundation for ETF custody, crypto settlement, and on-chain payments. The Payment Giants’ Stablecoin Ambitions When Stripe acquired Bridge in 2024, most saw it as a Web3 infrastructure play. But when Bridge filed for a National Trust Bank Charter, the real strategy emerged: Stripe doesn’t just want to embrace crypto — it wants to control it. Co-founder Zach Abrams stated:“We’re turning stablecoins into regulated core financial primitives.” That means Stripe is building a new payment infrastructure model: Businesses issue their own stablecoins via Bridge. Reserves and settlements are custodied within Bridge’s banking framework. Stablecoins are natively integrated into Stripe’s payment network. This model aligns closer to traditional finance than to Circle’s or Ripple’s approaches. Stripe isn’t just issuing tokens — it’s rebuilding the middle layer of the U.S. dollar payment stack. That’s why Phantom’s CASH, MetaMask’s mUSD, and Hyperliquid’s USDH all chose Bridge as an issuance partner. Why Everyone Wants the Same Charter Because this charter is the OCC’s highest-level crypto financial license — a national trust bank designation that carries:Broader legal authority than state-level trust licenses, Wider service scope and interstate recognition, Direct access to federal payment and settlement networks. Without it, even the largest stablecoin firms remain “shadow banks. With it, they become participants in the U.S. financial system — able to clear, custody, and collaborate institutionally. This isn’t just about compliance — it’s about hierarchy. In the coming decade, the leading stablecoin won’t be the one with the biggest market cap, but the one that’s chartered. Revisiting the GENIUS Act Since the enactment of the GENIUS Act, U.S. regulators have, for the first time, defined stablecoins systematically: Only three types of entities may legally issue them: Federally chartered banks, Nonbank trust institutions regulated by the OCC, State-licensed issuers with circulation below $10 billion. This creates a three-tier regulatory architecture: Top tier: Federal license (Circle, Ripple, Paxos are applying) Middle tier: State-level oversight (e.g., NYDFS) Bottom tier: Restricted issuers (small projects) Law firm Winston & Strawn summarized it best:“The Act incentivizes stablecoin issuers to climb upward, because state licenses alone can’t support nationwide operations.” In other words, the GENIUS Act is pushing crypto companies from ‘quasi-banks’ to true banks. Beyond Compliance: A Structural Convergence This wave of applications marks more than regulatory adaptation — it’s the crypto industry’s active integration into the U.S. financial system. For a decade, decentralization was about resisting financial centralization. Now, stablecoin giants are pursuing reciprocal centralization — entering the system to achieve legitimacy. It’s a decentralization correction movement. The boundaries between DeFi, CeFi, and TradFi are fading. Circle becomes a licensed digital currency bank; Ripple connects to the Fed’s payment rail; Stripe’s Bridge powers on-chain payments. The crypto world is no longer a parallel financial system — it’s embedding itself into the core of mainstream finance. Who’s Most Likely to Get Approved First?From a compliance standpoint: Circle: clear business focus and strong regulatory record — most likely to be approved first. Ripple: strong technology but ongoing legal baggage — uncertain. Paxos: regulatory reconciliation experience — likely next phase approval. Coinbase: steady institutional custody play — low-risk, gradual approval. Bridge (Stripe): positioned more as a payment integrator, not an issuer. As Galaxy Digital’s Alex Thorn observed:“In the future, stablecoin issuers will look more like banks — and banks will look more like stablecoin issuers.” Conclusion: Bankification Is Not the End — It’s the Beginning This “charter race” isn’t just about meeting regulatory requirements — it’s the pathway to a systemic trust upgrade: Future stablecoins won’t rely on banks — they will be banks. Future crypto payments won’t exist outside finance — they’ll be embedded within it. The future U.S. dollar won’t be paper — it’ll be a regulated, trusted, and settled on-chain symbol. As the financial core shifts from bank accounts to smart contracts, and regulators evolve from rejecting innovation to designing it, the bankification of stablecoins may, in fact, be the true beginning of the U.S. dollar’s digital era.

#DAT #BlackSwanShock Prologue: From Plunge to Inflection Point — The Market Reassesses the DAT Model in the Dark of Night Regarding the recent 10.11 black swan event, I believe everyone is already familiar with it. SuperEx also reported and analyzed it at the first moment — please click “Review of the 10/11 Crypto Flash Crash: The Truth Behind $20 Billion in Liquidations” for full details. To briefly recap: in the early hours of 10.11, Bitcoin plunged from the $117,000 range to below $102,000, a single-day drop of over 12%. Network-wide liquidations topped $19 billion, with more than 1.65 million users liquidated. However, the impact was not confined to the crypto market alone — public companies that use digital assets as core treasuries — DAT (Digital Asset Treasury) companies — also faced a major stress test. A few random examples: Forward Industries fell 15.32%; BTCS Inc. fell 12.70%; Helius Medical Tech fell 12.91%. In this article, I’ll break down: the impact of the 10.11 black swan on DAT companies and whether the risks and roadmaps of the DAT model itself are being reassessed at this moment. The Exposure of DAT Companies and Their Main Responses 1. About DAT Companies Before discussing specific companies, let’s clarify what a DAT company is. DAT companies (digital asset treasury firms) are publicly listed companies that treat the accumulation of digital assets as their core business and asset-allocation strategy. Compared with firms that merely hold crypto occasionally on their balance sheets, DAT companies adopt “hoarding coins” as a primary strategy. Their logic is: Provide “stock + coin” exposure for institutions or capital that cannot hold coins directly; Finance via treasury premia, forming a “financial flywheel” driven by equity + bonds + crypto assets; If digital assets rise further in the future, the stock price may amplify the upside. MicroStrategy (now commonly referred to as “Strategy / MSTR”) was the pioneer and most representative case of this approach. Starting in 2020, it incorporated Bitcoin into its treasury and kept adding. Since 2020, its share price has seen over 3,000% gains as Bitcoin rose. The rapid replication of the DAT model was driven by the market’s consensus on Bitcoin’s rise and a strong demand for a so-called “compliant coin-holding pathway.” In short, the DAT model (DATCOs) enables traditional capital to participate in digital assets via the equity route. Back to the core issue: the initial appeal of DAT companies lay in their unique “coin–equity fusion” strategy. By holding digital assets, companies could not only increase treasury value, but also provide investors with compliant exposure to crypto. In a bull market, this model can create notable premia and narratives. However, under extreme conditions, the same model reveals intrinsic fragility. In calm markets, the advantages of DAT lie in flexible capital operations and compelling investment stories; in volatile markets, the drawbacks concentrate into dual risks: direct exposure to crypto price swings and the indirect impact of equity-market liquidity tightening. DAT companies are like high-speed twin-engine sports cars — when extreme conditions arrive without a safety net, risks scale up rapidly. A core lesson of 10.11 is the importance of liquidity management. In panic, investors prefer to withdraw via stocks rather than crypto, making the share price of DAT companies the liquidity buffer channel. Especially for small- and mid-cap companies, sell orders hit prices hard, leading to drops far exceeding the underlying asset’s moves. This shows that the interaction between market confidence and liquidity can, under extreme conditions, form a self-reinforcing negative feedback loop. This also reveals a deeper logic: what truly causes a company’s valuation to crash is often not a single asset’s price swing, but the combination of collective psychology and system design. In extreme markets, a DAT company’s share price becomes an instant verdict on the market’s trust in its treasury model. 2. In This Downturn, DAT Companies Became a Hard-Hit Sector. Main Manifestations: 1）Direct Balance-Sheet Compression For companies dominated by digital assets, a price drop translates into book losses. Even if unrealized, these must be reflected on financial statements as unrealized losses. 2）Confidence Collapse and Premium Compression In bull markets, DAT companies often trade at a premium over NAV (mNAV premium). In sharp sell-offs, this premium compresses rapidly. 3）Stocks as a Withdrawal Channel When the crypto market becomes hard to sell, investors turn to the equity market to dump stocks offering “coin + stock” exposure. Thin-liquidity, small DATs are particularly vulnerable, suffering outsized drops. 4）Amplified Debt and Financing Risks Some DAT companies used leverage or issued convertibles to buy coins or expand. The 10.11 decline crystallized their leverage risks: if prices fall further, they may be forced to sell coins or even trigger financial defaults. 5）Liquidity Dispersion Becomes Obvious Large DATs such as MicroStrategy enjoy relatively better equity-market liquidity buffers, making declines somewhat more contained; small DATs, with thin trading, can see a single sell order crack support and drive much steeper losses. 6）Valuation Re-examination and an S&P Exclusion Signal Notably, in 2025 the S&P 500 declined to include Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy) in the index. S&P’s index committee may be reluctant to admit companies that are “essentially Bitcoin funds” into core indices — symbolically, a setback in market recognition. Lessons for the Industry from 10.11 and the DAT Turmoil Industry Lesson 1: The Advent of Structural Risk 10.11 reminds participants that the crypto market has entered a structural-risk phase. Black swans are no longer merely occasional — they are natural outcomes of internal resonance and high leverage. Traditional hedging can fail in crypto because the market lacks a centralized supervisory core and sufficient liquidity buffers. DAT risk management must account for structural imbalances, not just rely on simple asset diversification. Industry Lesson 2: Liquidity Governance as a Line Between Life and Death Whether DATs can withstand future black swans hinges on liquidity governance. The market is shifting from a “token-issuance & market-making” model to a “governance & liquidity-management” model. Those who keep funds stable under extremes will win the next growth cycle. This concerns not only internal risk control, but also market design, investor behavior, and capital-structure coordination. Industry Lesson 3: Trust Rebuilding and the Compliance Era Black swans also accelerate the convergence of regulation and industry self-discipline. In the future, trust in crypto markets will rely not only on immutability of code, but also on transparency, compliance, and co-governance. To endure, DATs must make compliance a strategic core, bring digital-treasury management into formal governance frameworks, and diversify to reduce single-asset exposure. The Future of the DAT Track: From Passive Hoarding to Active Value Creation After the turmoil, the DAT track will likely evolve from passive holding to active appreciation. Going forward, DATs will participate more in on-chain economic activities — including staking, liquidity provision, and on-chain governance — transforming treasuries from static asset containers into engines of recurring cash flow. Meanwhile, the tokenization wave of Real-World Assets (RWA) is rising; DATs can become bridges between traditional and digital economies, achieving both diversification and value accretion. Conclusion: Sector Recalibration After the Black Swan Although the 10.11 black swan impacted DAT companies, it also offered the track a chance for collective recalibration. Survivors will possess stronger resilience and market toughness. The evolution of the DAT track is not a simple coin-hoarding logic; it is a comprehensive upgrade — from financial innovation to ecosystem building, liquidity governance, and compliant operations. For investors, understanding the track’s inner logic, strategic differences among companies, and market signals will determine long-term returns in digital assets. The life-and-death observation of DAT companies tells us: in the crypto world, those who truly win the future are not the ones with the strongest technology, but those with the most self-healing and the keenest adaptability to system volatility. After the 10.11 black swan, the entire industry is moving toward a more mature and more institutionalized new era.

#Crypto #Cryptomarket Forty-eight hours have passed, and many still haven’t recovered from the October 11 crypto market flash crash. $20 billion in assets vanished into thin air — truly shocking. Data show that Bitcoin briefly lost the $110,000 level, Ethereum plunged more than 17%, and various altcoins suffered declines to varying degrees. In the past 24 hours alone, nearly $20 billion in positions were liquidated across the network, with over 1.65 million traders liquidated. In the early hours of October 11, 2025, the crypto market experienced yet another heart-stopping flash crash. Within just a few hours, global liquidations neared $20 billion, and over 1.65 million traders faced forced liquidations. Bitcoin briefly fell below $110,000, Ethereum dropped over 17%, and the altcoin market was in utter distress — XRP and Dogecoin each plunged over 30% at one point. The turmoil shook not only crypto but also traditional markets: all three major U.S. stock indices hit one-month lows, crude oil printed a five-month low, while gold rose against the tide as a haven. This flash crash resulted from a combination of factors: macroeconomics, internal market leverage, stablecoin depegs, and whale activity. This article reviews the event, analyzes market drivers, and offers investor strategies to help readers understand the logic behind the volatility and adopt safer, more efficient asset-management tools. 10.11 Flash Crash Recap 1. Overview of Flash Crash Data According to Coinglass, within 24 hours in the early hours of October 11, total liquidations reached $19.279 billion, including $16.794 billion in long liquidations and $2.485 billion in short liquidations. Hyperliquid became the “hardest-hit area” this round: its ETH-USDT contract saw a single liquidation as large as $203 million, with $642 million USDC in net outflows for the day; total AUM dropped from $6.0 billion USDC at the end of September to around $5.1 billion USDC. Specific data log： Bitcoin (BTC): Fell to as low as $102,000; –12.7% max drop in 30 minutes; then rebounded slightly to $112,000; down about 7.8% on the day. Ethereum (ETH): Fell to $3,435; –14.3% max 30-minute drop; down about 12% on the day. Major altcoins: Total crypto market cap fell to $3.84T, down about 9.35% in 24 hours. BTC dominance: 58.45%; ETH dominance: 13.46%. 2. Synchronized Moves in Global Markets This crypto flash crash wasn’t isolated. All three major U.S. stock indices hit one-month lows; the S&P 500 and Nasdaq posted their biggest daily drops in half a year; the Dow fell for five consecutive sessions. The ICE Dollar Index (DXY) fell over 0.7%, and the U.S. 10-year benchmark yield broke below 4.04%. Crude oil closed at a five-month low, its largest drop in three months. Gold rose instead, with NY gold futures up nearly 1.7% and spot gold up nearly 1.2%, becoming the preferred safe haven. 3. Immediate Triggers Behind the Event (1) Renewed U.S.–China trade tensions China added five rare earths to export controls and expanded restrictions on refining technologies and overseas military/semiconductor applications. Trump then announced an additional 100% tariff on Chinese exports to the U.S. and imposed key software export controls. This string of headlines sparked fear, directly triggering simultaneous declines in crypto and global equities. (2) Exchange system stress During the flash crash, many exchanges experienced high load and latency: Binance: Spiking activity caused short-term delays; the insurance fund fell from $1.23B to $1.04B to address extreme conditions. Hyperliquid: Despite record volumes, systems remained stable; the HLP vault earned over $40M in a single day. Backpack, Lighter: Saw order lag, latency, and vault drawdowns but recovered quickly. OKX, Uniswap: Stable operations; smooth processing; no major outages. Exchange stability directly affected how selling pressure propagated and highlighted differences in risk-management capabilities across platforms. (3) Excess leverage and market-maker dislocations An early-October rally drew in heavy leverage. The flash crash set off auto-liquidation cascades, compounded by exchange outages and market-maker failures, causing extreme, momentary price air-pockets. Several tokens — USDe, WBETH, WBTC and other stablecoin-like or derivative assets — depegged, further intensifying panic. (4) Whale activity On-chain data show certain whale accounts were unusually active during the drop: A Hyperliquid whale closed BTC and ETH shorts near the lows, netting roughly $200M in profit. Another whale, with short positions established on September 22, partially took profit during the October 11 move, realizing $78.56M. Multiple whales amplified short-term volatility, creating a “snowball” cascade. History shows whales can magnify market swings in extreme conditions, drawing in retail panic selling and accelerating flash crashes. Stablecoin Depegging Events USDe, WBETH, BNSOL, and others depegged under stress: We USDe: Fell to as low as $0.6567. Secondary-market price fluctuated, but mint/redemptions remained normal and over-collateralization was maintained. WBETH, BNSOL: Briefly deviated from pegs, triggering forced liquidations. Exchange responses: Binance pledged compensation for affected users within 72 hours and enhanced index calculations and risk-parameter reviews to prevent recurrences. Depegs revealed latent risks from high-leverage collateral, oracle/feed mechanisms, and insufficient exchange arbitrage efficiency, reminding investors to pay extra attention to risk management in extreme markets. Performance Divergence: CEX, DEX, and DeFi Platforms Amid Turmoil Hyperliquid: Fully on-chain system ran stably; single-day peak volumes hit records with no system latency; HLP vault return exceeded 10%. Binance: Periods of high load and some user delays; $188M of the insurance fund deployed to address tail risk; compensation program initiated. Backpack, Lighter: Brief order-handling and vault anomalies under traffic shocks, now recovered. Aster, edgeX, ParaDEX: Operated normally throughout or outperformed market-average returns, showcasing decentralized platforms’ resilience under pressure. The contrast suggests decentralized platforms offer higher transparency and operational stability in extremes, while centralized platforms still rely on insurance funds and human intervention at peak load. Multiple Institutions and Analysts Remain Optimistic for the Short Term and the Quarter Institutional inflows: Bitwise’s CIO indicated record Q4 inflows into Bitcoin ETFs — long-term bullish for BTC. Gold and havens: Geopolitical and tariff risks have boosted safe-haven demand for gold and Bitcoin. ETFs and staking: Ethereum ETFs enabling staking will reduce circulating supply and increase long-term demand. Whales and leverage: Short-term profit-taking may keep volatility elevated, but long-term holders and institutional capital support market stabilization. Investor strategies to consider: Keep positions moderate; control leverage risk. Track liquidity and collateral mechanisms of stablecoins and high-leverage assets. Diversify platforms and asset allocations to reduce exchange concentration risk. Monitor macro policy, geopolitics, and sentiment — adjust flexibly. Conclusion The 10.11 flash crash again reminds investors that crypto is highly leveraged and structurally fragile. Exchange systems, whale operations, stablecoin depegs, and macro factors can all spark extreme moves. Despite sharp short-term swings, there remain supportive tailwinds: institutional inflows, ETF expansion, and ongoing market maturation. Investors should synthesize market data, exchange performance, on-chain whale behavior, and the macro backdrop to craft robust strategies and guard against tail-risk scenarios.

#Web3Wallet #SuperWallet For every crypto participant, a Web3 wallet is far more than just a place to store funds — it’s the key to the entire Web3 world. From DeFi, NFTs, and GameFi to DID systems and on-chain ecosystems, every on-chain activity begins with a wallet. Among them, MetaMask remains the most iconic example. For years, it was everyone’s default choice — a simple browser extension wallet that “just worked.” But as the industry evolves, cross-chain ecosystems expand, and asset scales grow, a new generation of wallets has emerged. From early cold wallets that only stored Bitcoin to today’s multi-chain wallets that connect to DeFi, NFTs, GameFi, and even social apps with a single click — the industry is shifting from “tools” to “ecosystem interfaces.” Today, the market features a wide range of representative Web3 wallets — Trust Wallet, OKX Wallet, Bitget Wallet, Phantom, and Super Wallet, among others. Each claims to be “secure,” “decentralized,” and “user-friendly.” But which one truly fits the needs of modern Web3 users — and which is worth trusting for the long term? The truth is: the wallet market has entered an era of professional segmentation. Some focus on seamless UX — “one-click interaction, zero barrier.” Some emphasize multi-chain and cross-chain capabilities. Some prioritize security, building advanced key management systems. Others aim to become “super gateways”, integrating trading, social, DeFi, and identity functions. In this article, we’ll compare leading Web3 wallets across four key dimensions: security, usability, functionality, and ecosystem adaptability — because in an era redefined by decentralization, the real competition isn’t about stacking features, but about who can make users both safe and free. Click to register SuperEx Click to download the SuperEx APP Click to enter SuperEx CMC Click to enter SuperEx DAO Academy — Space The Landscape of Mainstream Web3 Wallets Currently, mainstream wallet products can be grouped into three major categories: Traditional DeFi Wallets: High market share, mature ecosystems, but technically oriented.Examples: MetaMask, Trust Wallet CEX-Integrated Wallets: Seamless connection with centralized platforms, smooth UX but relatively closed ecosystems.Examples: OKX Wallet, Binance Web3 Wallet Next-Generation Multi-Chain Wallets: Focus on cross-chain capability, asset isolation, security, and UX upgrades. Examples: Super Wallet, Rabby, Unisat Each type has distinctive strengths — and clear limitations. 1. MetaMask: The Veteran of Web3, But No Longer Lightweight As the pioneer wallet of the Ethereum ecosystem, MetaMask’s historical importance is unquestionable. Yet it also shows clear “signs of aging.” Security risks: Phishing sites and fake links frequently lead to private key leaks. Complex UX: Adding networks, adjusting gas fees, and managing chains are intimidating for newcomers. Limited interoperability: Ethereum-first architecture restricts cross-chain capability. Back in 2021, MetaMask was essential for every beginner. But by 2025, it feels more like a developer’s tool than a consumer-facing asset gateway. 2. Trust Wallet: Multi-Chain Master, Fragmented Experience As Binance’s official wallet, Trust Wallet leads in multi-chain coverage — supporting BTC, ETH, BNB, Solana, Avalanche, and over 70 blockchains. Its intuitive interface and accessibility make it a go-to wallet for both beginners and advanced users. For newcomers exploring digital assets, Trust Wallet offers comprehensive guides and explanations — an invaluable resource for onboarding. However, its downsides are equally clear: Too many scattered features — it feels like a “universal remote control.” Lack of unified permission and security isolation systems, resulting in periodic asset breach incidents. “All-rounder” positioning, but no integrated approach to UX or safety architecture. No 2FA support, exposing users to higher security risks. In short, Trust Wallet’s strength lies in inclusivity — but its security and structural integration still lag behind. 3. OKX Wallet: The Perfect Extension of a CEX Ecosystem OKX Wallet follows a distinct path: merging CeFi and DeFi into a single experience. Its standout feature is that users can manage both centralized and on-chain assets within the same account. However, this hybrid model comes with trade-offs: Private keys and funds still partially rely on centralized infrastructure. Expansion limited by the OKX ecosystem. Less appealing to users outside the CEX user base. In essence, OKX Wallet is the Web3 entry ticket for CEX users, rather than a fully decentralized wallet. 4. Super Wallet: A New Paradigm of Multi-Chain Security and User Sovereignty While most wallets compete through feature stacking, the SuperEx team took a cleaner, architectural approach with Super Wallet — putting security and user autonomy at the core of its design. 1) HD Wallet Architecture: Hierarchical Determinism Super Wallet uses an HD (Hierarchical Deterministic) model, where a single mnemonic phrase can generate multiple independent addresses and private keys. This means: No need to create separate wallets for each chain. If one address is compromised, other assets remain safe. Simple management without sacrificing security. It’s an elegant “minimal yet stable” solution rarely achieved by traditional wallets. 2) Asset Isolation: Layered Security Super Wallet introduces a unique asset isolation mechanism, allowing users to segregate storage by chain or asset type — effectively adding a firewall to digital assets. Even if a smart contract on one chain is exploited, other assets remain untouched. 3) Smart External Authorization: Secure, Granular Access Traditional wallets often require users to authorize entire wallet addresses when interacting with DeFi or NFT platforms — like handing over your whole bank card. Super Wallet solves this with granular authorization: users can approve specific assets for certain smart contracts. For example, granting a GameFi dApp access to only 10 USDT — not your entire wallet. This delivers a massive leap in both security and flexibility. 4) Multi-Chain and Cross-Chain Support: A True One-Stop Experience Super Wallet natively supports Ethereum, BNB Chain, Solana, and others. It features built-in cross-chain protocols — no third-party bridges required — enabling seamless asset migration while cutting gas costs and friction. 5) UI and Experience: As Intuitive as Mobile Banking Super Wallet’s interface redefines wallet UX: One-click transfer, one-click authorization, one-click chain switching. Automatic token type and risk detection. Visualized asset distribution dashboard. For everyday users, it’s a wallet that “speaks human.” For professionals, it’s a strategic instrument — efficient yet highly defensive. Super Wallet’s biggest strengths lie in security and user sovereignty. Its asset isolation and smart authorization design make it particularly appealing to institutional users and high-net-worth investors. Conclusion: The Future of Web3 Wallets Lies in User-Centric Design From MetaMask’s developer mindset, to Trust Wallet’s feature overload, to Super Wallet’s self-custody and autonomy-first system, we’re witnessing the three eras of wallet evolution: Tool Era: Functional but unfriendly (MetaMask) Platform Era: Managed but semi-centralized (OKX / Trust Wallet) Autonomy Era: Controllable, seamless, and open (Super Wallet) In the next phase of crypto, the wallets that triumph will be those that empower users with true control and seamless access across ecosystems. Because in the Web3 world, the real winner isn’t the one with the most features — it’s the one that makes users both safe and free.

#Token2049 #Web3 #Crypto The 2025 TOKEN2049 Conference in Singapore concluded successfully, drawing 25,000 participants from over 160 countries, along with 500 exhibitors and 300 speakers at Marina Bay Sands. More importantly, the atmosphere — that long-lost bullish optimism — was far more vibrant than the sarcasm and skepticism on Crypto Twitter. This year’s Token2049 sent a clear message: the crypto market is entering a new infrastructure cycle — driven by Perpetual DEXs, stablecoins, prediction markets, and DeAI. This is no longer a frenzy powered by memes or narratives, but a rational, trust-rebuilding phase in the evolution of Web3. Below is an on-the-ground breakdown of the seven defining trends shaping crypto in 2025. Trend 1: The Rise of Perpetual DEXs — The “Monetary Layer” of New Capital Markets At this year’s Token2049, two topics dominated nearly every closed-door meeting and investor session: Perpetual DEXs and stablecoins. These terms now represent more than just products — they’ve become the new monetary and settlement layers of the crypto ecosystem. Perpetual contracts have stepped into the spotlight because they solve two of centralized exchanges’ (CEXs) biggest flaws: transparency and global accessibility. With the evolution of on-chain liquidity protocols, DEXs can now offer trading experiences approaching CEX-level performance — while remaining immutable and self-custodial. In short, Perpetual DEXs are becoming the settlement infrastructure of crypto-native capital markets. Projects like Hyperliquid, dYdX, and Drift are leading the way, with liquidity, latency, and matching speeds nearing centralized standards. As market trust shifts from “I trust the exchange” to “I trust the code”, the foundational logic of crypto markets is being rewritten. This is not just a technical evolution but a financial migration. In the next two years, decentralized derivatives platforms are likely to move from “participants” to “the standard.” Trend 2: Stablecoins — The Energy Valve of the Global Crypto Economy If Perpetual DEXs form the new monetary layer, stablecoins are the lifeblood of global crypto liquidity. Entrepreneurs from Southeast Asia, Africa, and Latin America repeatedly emphasized one fact at the conference: in their regions, “crypto” might still sound foreign, but “the dollar on-chain” has already become a daily reality. In inflation-ridden and currency-volatile economies, USDT and USDC are now used for payments, savings, and salaries. By 2025, the stablecoin landscape is clearly diverging structurally: Tether remains the market’s stabilizing force, holding about 70% share; Circle expands its institutional footprint through regulatory compliance; PayPal USD and USAT (Tether’s U.S.-compliant coin) are opening bridges to traditional finance. The deeper logic here: stablecoins are becoming digital-dollar intermediaries within the global financial system. They are no longer just tools for traders — they’ve evolved into cross-border payment, storage, and settlement infrastructure. Once stablecoins fully transform from “trading units” to “digital currency infrastructure,” the energy valve of the crypto economy will be permanently opened. Trend 3: Real-Time Trading + eSports + Live Streaming — The Underrated Dark Horse This was one of the biggest surprises of Token2049. Beyond the main stage, side events and demo showcases revealed a hidden focus: the gamification and livestreaming of trading. Imagine this: A streamer goes live on Hyperliquid, taking a long position on SOL. Viewers can mirror trades, tip, or bet in real-time. The system generates an on-chain leaderboard, where PnL (profit and loss) becomes a form of social capital. Fans can even bet on their favorite traders — just like supporting an eSports team. This new trend, known as SpecFi + StreamFi, follows a clear logic: Trading is, at its core, a form of competition. When combined with social features, data, and incentives, it transforms into entertainment. Livestreaming closes the loop between watching → interacting → investing. The rise of Pumpfun exemplifies this shift — turning meme speculation into participatory entertainment. Spectators, bettors, and creators form a complete social speculation ecosystem. By Q4 2025, real-time trading and gamified livestreams could emerge as the most underestimated high-growth narrative in the market. Trend 4: Prediction Markets — From “Betting on Outcomes” to “Betting on Reality” At Token2049’s Founders Forum, many entrepreneurs highlighted a major transformation: prediction markets are becoming a core financial primitive. Once dismissed as niche or gambling tools, prediction markets like Polymarket, Zeitgeist, and HyperPlay are evolving into composable financial layers. Now, people can trade on election results, weather data, economic metrics, social trends, corporate KPIs, or even influencer popularity. As AI agents start analyzing real-world data and executing trades, prediction markets become the financial interface for real-world information entering the blockchain. In essence: Perpetual DEXs let users speculate on assets. Prediction markets let users bet on reality itself. This marks the second stage of the financialization of reality — no longer pure speculation, but a systematic reflection of intelligent market expectations. Trend 5: DeAI — Survival of the Fittest After the AI Hype The AI frenzy has cooled off. AI tokens are down over 70% from their peaks, and many projects have disappeared. But what remains is far more meaningful — DeAI (Decentralized AI) projects. DeAI lies at the intersection of AI and DeFi: intelligent agents autonomously manage treasuries, execute trading strategies, audit contracts, and even vote in governance. This evolution can be viewed in three layers: AI-assisted DeFi operations — improving risk control and yield optimization; AI-driven on-chain automation — agents executing complex logic; DeAI Networks — decentralized coordination of AI models and compute resources via blockchain. At Token2049, several DeAI teams showcased AI DAOs and Autonomous Treasury prototypes, underscoring the immense potential of this sector. The AI downturn, in fact, was healthy — it cleared the noise and left only the builders. As one VC aptly put it:“DeAI will be the next sector with real cash flow, not just narrative hype.” Trend 6: East Asia Rising — Korea Becomes the New Crypto Hub For years, the crypto narrative was dominated by the West — Wall Street institutions, SEC regulations, and U.S.-centric trends. Now, a new epicenter is emerging: East Asia, particularly South Korea. Korea’s crypto adoption rate exceeds 31%, higher than Japan or the U.S. Upbit’s daily trading volume has surpassed Binance’s for many new token launches. Global VCs now list Korea as a top market for consumer-facing innovation. While the West focuses on institutional and compliance tracks, East Asia excels in consumer and cultural adoption — from social trading to blockchain gaming and meme economies. In 2025, the next bull run won’t be led by Wall Street, but by Asian retail investors, creators, and on-chain communities. The rise of East Asia signals a cultural shift in crypto’s global center of gravity. Trend 7: VC Rationalization — From Narrative Speculation to Real Growth Over the past two years, venture capital has been flush with stablecoins — and fantasies. Now, the tone has changed. At Token2049’s investor roundtables, top fund partners openly stated:“We still have dry powder — but we’re done paying for stories.” Investment criteria now resemble traditional SaaS metrics: Focus on user numbers, not Twitter followers. Look at retention rates, not short-term TVL. Evaluate revenue models, not airdrop hype. This signals Web3’s entry into a professionalization era: speculators exit, builders take the stage. VCs are making fewer but deeper bets — and teams with real data, real products, and compounding growth will capture the next big funding window. On-Site Observation: Reality Is More Bullish Than Social Media Perhaps the most important takeaway from Token2049 wasn’t a project or token — but the mood. While Crypto Twitter remains drenched in pessimism, the energy on-site was electric. From industry giants like OKX and Coinbase to fresh DeFi startups, everyone was focused on building, not chasing overnight riches. As Token2049 Co-Founder Alex Fiskum put it:“We want every attendee to feel the real temperature of the crypto industry. This isn’t just a conference — it’s an awakening.” That sentiment reflects a maturing market. Conclusion: From the “Narrative Cycle” to the “Building Cycle” 2021–2023 was the era of narrative-driven cycles; 2024–2026 marks the rise of builder-driven cycles. The underlying logic of this new phase is clear: Perpetual DEXs form the liquidity base; Stablecoins reshape global settlement; Prediction markets merge with real-world data; DeAI introduces autonomous intelligence into finance; Asian markets drive consumer applications; Capital returns to rationality and long-term value. This isn’t the end of the bubble — it’s the maturation of the ecosystem. From the energy at Token2049, one thing is certain: the next phase of crypto will be built not on hype, but on products, data, and compounding growth. The Web3 building cycle has officially begun.

#CFTC #SEC Introduction: A “Belated Coordination” and the “Prelude to a New Financial Era” For over a decade, the U.S. financial regulatory system has resembled a “divided city-state”: On one side stands the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission), guarding the borders of the securities markets; On the other, the CFTC (Commodity Futures Trading Commission), overseeing derivatives and commodities. Each had its own turf and rules — until digital assets and DeFi blurred those boundaries. Is Bitcoin a “commodity” or a “security”? Does Ethereum’s staking mechanism violate securities law? Who should oversee stablecoins? Each of these questions has repeatedly sparked debate, lawsuits, and market panic. But this time, the SEC and CFTC’s top officials appeared side by side — announcing “a new framework for coordinated cooperation.” This was more than a meeting; it felt like an act of historical reconciliation. After a decade of regulatory fragmentation, the U.S. is finally attempting to piece together its “broken financial oversight system.” For traditional finance, it’s an institutional update; for the crypto market, it’s nearly a “compliance revolution.” Click to register SuperEx Click to download the SuperEx APP Click to enter SuperEx CMC Click to enter SuperEx DAO Academy — Space A Fragmented Regulatory System: The Invisible Ceiling on Innovation The U.S. has long been a cradle of financial innovation — from ETFs and derivatives to online brokerage firms, every wave of change began there. Yet in the age of cryptocurrency, this once-dynamic hub has slowed down unexpectedly. The problem isn’t technology — it’s regulation. The SEC and CFTC have long disagreed on how to define digital assets: The SEC tends to treat tokens as securities, requiring issuers to comply with the Securities Act’s registration and disclosure rules; The CFTC, meanwhile, views Bitcoin and Ethereum as commodities, asserting that their trading can fall under the futures regulatory framework. This “dual-track contradiction” has trapped many innovative products in a gray area. Some DeFi projects, for example, involve both token issuance (under the SEC) and leveraged derivatives (under the CFTC). The result: neither agency approves them, and neither wants the liability. As one commissioner bluntly put it during the meeting: “Over the past decade, this field is littered with the corpses of ‘products that never launched.’” Behind that remark lies the story of countless startups that collapsed in regulatory limbo — not because they broke the law, but because they didn’t know which rules to follow. Thus, this cooperation isn’t merely a handshake — it’s an attempt to restore order to a disordered market. It marks the most critical step toward modernizing U.S. financial regulation: replacing confrontation with coordination. The Era of Co-Governance: Cooperation, Not Consolidation It’s important to note that this SEC–CFTC alliance is not an institutional merger, but rather a model of Regulatory Co-Governance. SEC Chair Gary Gensler stated: “We’re not restructuring the system — we’re making regulation more coordinated.” CFTC Chair Rostin Behnam added: “Financial innovation should never be an excuse for a regulatory vacuum. Regulators must be interconnected like a network, not isolated like islands.” These two sentences perfectly encapsulate the spirit of the meeting. Historically, the U.S. financial regulatory system thrived on “checks and balances.” That approach worked well for 20th-century securities and futures markets — but in the Web3 era, it’s become cumbersome. Take Bitcoin ETF approvals: the SEC focuses on investor protection and disclosure, while the CFTC handles market risk controls. Their overlapping reviews and inconsistent standards slow market efficiency. As one CFTC commissioner admitted, “We’ve spent too much time defining problems, and not enough time solving them.” Hence, the true meaning of this coordination lies in breaking down silos — sharing information, aligning processes, and bridging boundaries. 1. Building an Information-Sharing Mechanism: From Isolation to Interconnection According to the meeting consensus, the agencies will create a unified risk-information sharing platform, including data on token issuance, on-chain transaction monitoring, and high-risk asset lists. This means that if the CFTC detects potential manipulation in a crypto derivative, the SEC can immediately access that data and take follow-up actions — and vice versa. The result: faster regulatory response, fewer duplicate investigations, and less overlap in enforcement. Gensler remarked: “We can’t keep locking regulatory data in 20th-century filing cabinets. The risks of digital assets are real-time — our supervision must be, too.” This statement captures the essence of the reform: regulatory information flow will become the new infrastructure of finance. 2. Joint Regulatory Sandbox: Innovation and Compliance in Parallel Perhaps the most groundbreaking aspect is the planned joint “Digital Asset Regulatory Sandbox”. Within this sandbox, emerging projects can test their products in a controlled environment, with both agencies evaluating risks and guiding compliance paths. This directly addresses the “innovation anxiety” many startups face. In the past, blockchain founders often didn’t know which agency had jurisdiction — and got trapped in legal uncertainty even before launch. Now, they can enter the sandbox and receive clear, coordinated feedback. This not only reduces entrepreneurial risk but also helps regulators understand new technologies early — preventing policy lag from the outset. Behnam emphasized: “We can’t wait for innovators to fail before we step in. Preemptive oversight is key to a healthy innovation cycle.” The U.S. is thus experimenting with collaborative regulation — redefining the relationship between innovation and order. 3. From Confrontation to Consensus: A Cultural Shift in Regulation This “co-governance model” represents more than procedural alignment — it marks a cultural transformation. In the chaotic years of crypto regulation, the SEC and CFTC were often mocked for “fighting their own wars”: the SEC sued issuers for illegal securities offerings, while the CFTC simultaneously approved futures for similar assets. This inconsistency eroded market confidence. In this meeting, both chairs highlighted the need for regulatory consistency. Gensler said: “Investors shouldn’t face different levels of protection just because an asset is defined differently by two agencies.” Behnam added: “Consistent rules protect not only investors — but also innovators.” This is a true consensus. It signifies that regulators are shifting from the question of “Who should regulate?” to “How do we regulate well?” This cultural cooling and coordination may prove more historically significant than any policy reform. 4. The Second Phase of Regulation: From “Blurred Boundaries” to “Functional Layers” If the past decade was about “definitional battles,” the next decade will be about functional stratification. Under the new framework: The SEC will focus on investor protection, disclosure, and asset registration; The CFTC will oversee derivatives, leverage, and risk monitoring systems. Their data systems will interconnect, creating a layered supervisory structure. This ensures that every crypto transaction has a clear “chain of accountability” — from issuance (SEC) to trading (CFTC) to cross-border settlement and clearing. This is what Gensler calls a shift “from rule-based to outcome-based supervision.” In other words, regulation will focus less on defining what a token is and more on ensuring the market is fair, transparent, and safe. 5. The Beginning of a Regulatory Symphony, Not Its Finale When the market sees the SEC and CFTC sharing a stage, it may not yet feel the immediate effects — but at a macro level, this marks the dawn of Cooperative Governance in U.S. finance. In the future, this co-governance model may extend to stablecoin legislation, tokenized real-world assets (RWA), and even AI-driven financial models. Behnam concluded the meeting with a telling metaphor: “Regulators and innovators are in the same river. We shouldn’t block each other’s flow — we should make the current steadier.” Perhaps that sentence best defines the coming decade of crypto finance: from regulatory discord to institutional harmony — a true coming-of-age for U.S. digital finance. Strategic Shift in Digital Assets: From the Gray Zone to the Mainstream For the crypto industry, the biggest winners of this “regulatory resonance” will be mainstream assets and institutional players. 1. Compliance Tailwinds for Core Assets Like Bitcoin and Ethereum With the SEC and CFTC reaching consensus, Bitcoin’s commodity status will be further solidified. Ethereum’s PoS compliance controversy may also be clarified under the new framework. This paves the way for traditional financial institutions — such as pension funds and sovereign wealth funds — to legally allocate into crypto assets. 2. New Definition Window for Stablecoins and Tokenized Securities (RWA) Once regulation becomes clearer, the legal boundaries for stablecoin issuance and asset tokenization will be more defined. Stablecoins like USDC and PYUSD may soon be subject to both SEC disclosure and CFTC trading review — a challenge, but also a ticket to mainstream payment systems. 3. Institutional Market Liquidity Rebuilt With clearer division of duties, the derivatives and futures markets (CFTC) can interconnect with the spot markets (SEC). This will enable seamless movement between crypto ETFs, futures contracts, and on-chain liquidity — laying the foundation for a new Web3 financial credit system. In short, co-governance doesn’t restrict — it transforms the “gray zone” into a legitimate channel. Crypto firms can now innovate within clear boundaries, without the constant fear of sudden enforcement. Conclusion: From the “Walnut Tree to the Blockchain” — A Continuum of Financial Spirit From Wall Street’s stock exchanges to Silicon Valley’s crypto labs, America’s financial spirit has always been one of innovating to rebuild order. The SEC–CFTC collaboration is more than a regulatory event — it’s a signal: regulation is no longer a brake, but a compass. When institutions start making room for innovation, and innovation stops evading institutions — that’s when the true symbiosis of the new financial era begins.

#Apple #TimCook #Bitcoin Recently, a clip from Tim Cook’s interview sent shockwaves through the crypto market and community. When Cook said, “I do own cryptocurrency,” the room fell silent for a few seconds — and the entire crypto market instantly heated up. Here is Cook’s full response: “It’s reasonable to own cryptocurrency as part of a diversified investment portfolio. And by the way, I’m not giving anyone investment advice. I’ve been interested in crypto for a while and have been researching it. So, I think it’s interesting.” Bear in mind: Tim Cook is the CEO of Apple, the most profitable tech company in the world. This isn’t the kind of remark you’d expect from some crypto KOL — it has even been interpreted by the market as a sign that tech giants are reassessing the value of the crypto world. That alone shows Cook’s weight. This article compiles key details and interpretations from multiple sources to help make sense of the significance of this event. Key Clues in Cook’s Admission of “Holding Crypto” A shift in context: from “watching” to “acting” For a long time, the tech industry’s attitude toward cryptocurrency has largely been “cautious observation” — especially regarding behaviors that might affect a company’s share price, user trust, or regulatory risk. Even at the technological frontier, many giants chose to keep a low profile or to build positions through equity stakes in blockchain infrastructure companies. Cook’s straightforward admission breaks this “mysterious boundary.” The Apple CEO said incorporating crypto into a personal portfolio is a “reasonable diversification” move. Simple as it sounds, it carries weight. Not a corporate move, but a personal asset decision After speaking, Cook clearly drew a boundary: this is merely his personal investment strategy and does not represent Apple’s capital decisions. He emphasized that Apple would not put crypto on its balance sheet, nor allow users to buy an iPhone or Mac with crypto. This distinction is crucial in traditional corporate governance — there must be a clear separation between a CEO’s personal assets and company strategy; otherwise it can trigger legal, regulatory, and investor-trust risks. A hint at holding history: three years in the making? Some media reports say Cook has held Bitcoin and Ethereum for as long as three years. In other words, he has “been researching crypto for quite a while,” not jumping in on a whim. That “long-term holding” may have started around the time of the 2024 Bitcoin halving, coinciding with a market undervaluation phase. If true, it suggests he’s a cautious entrant rather than an impulsive one. To truly understand this matter, you have to look not only at what he “said,” but also why he said it and how he said it. Tim Cook’s line — “I do indeed hold cryptocurrency” — may read like a casually worded personal remark on the surface, but within today’s macro and industry context it reveals deeper signals. We can break down the logic and intent of this statement from the following dimensions. Diversification & risk control In the interview, Cook explicitly framed adding crypto to a personal portfolio as a “reasonable diversification” strategy. This reveals his underlying logic: not speculation, but allocation. In traditional investment theory, diversification is considered a core method of reducing risk and smoothing returns. Crypto assets have relatively low correlation with stocks and bonds and can serve as a hedge. Put differently, Cook is not “betting on coin prices,” but making a rational asset-allocation decision. This approach mirrors that of many family offices and HNW investors — treating crypto as an “alternative allocation,” using a small percentage of capital to capture structural returns while diversifying against inflation and policy uncertainty. Avoiding altcoins, focusing on blue chips From public information so far, Cook has never mentioned holding any altcoins; the recurring keywords are “BTC” and “ETH.” In terms of market cap, liquidity, and institutional acceptance, these two are today’s “safety boundary” in crypto. For risk-averse investors, choosing BTC and ETH is akin to allocating to gold and the S&P 500 in traditional markets — a balance of stability and foresight. By contrast, highly volatile small-cap tokens lack transparent governance and fundamental support, which clearly doesn’t match the risk preference of a CEO at Cook’s level. His choices embody a stance: rational exposure rather than blindly chasing heat. Strictly separating personal and corporate roles This point is especially noteworthy. While Cook publicly acknowledged personal crypto holdings, he also made it clear: “Apple won’t buy cryptocurrency at the corporate level or put it on the balance sheet.” That means he is deliberately drawing a line between the individual and the enterprise. As one of the highest-market-cap public companies, Apple’s asset allocation has market-wide implications. If the company engaged in highly volatile crypto assets, it would inevitably worry investors. Cook’s clarity — “personal investments ≠ company strategy” — reflects prudent corporate governance and prevents public misinterpretation. He personally recognizes crypto assets, but Apple won’t deviate from its core business because of that. It’s a balance between rational investing and corporate stewardship. Cautious seepage, clear boundaries This also reflects Apple’s “soft-landing” strategy toward crypto. Although Apple has not launched any crypto payments, wallets, or trading products, the ecosystem has quietly laid groundwork: The App Store already allows compliant wallet apps to go live; Apple Pay has gradually expanded compatibility with certain Web3 services; Developer tools have added interfaces for interacting with blockchains. These seemingly small moves show that Apple is reserving interfaces for a future digital-asset era — but advancing in a steady, incremental, and non-flashy way. After all, for a company renowned for privacy, security, and a closed-loop ecosystem, rushing into a high-volatility, high-regulatory-risk crypto field neither fits its brand DNA nor its steady business cadence. Overall, Cook’s statement is not a whim, but a carefully considered signal. He is neither in the anti-crypto old guard nor recklessly plunging into the frenzy; rather, he is approaching a new asset era in an Apple-like way — rational, steady, and incremental. As traditional capital and digital assets converge, this may be the standard template for how tech giants “test the waters of the future.” Market Impact and Potential Ripple Effects Cook’s crypto holdings are not a rumor, nor is it a case of “one person with a few coins moving the market.” But as an influential figure in tech, his words carry several catalytic effects: Authority endorsement effect: When Apple’s CEO publicly admits owning BTC/ETH, it’s seen as a flare signaling that crypto is moving from an “other world” edge asset to a mainstream asset. Psychological trigger: Investors like reference points — Cook’s recognition may persuade more conservatives and corporate executives to consider crypto allocations. Media amplification: A brief interview line can be widely replayed by the media, forming a “collective-consensus” spread. Correlation spillovers: Apple is tightly linked with tech stocks and the broader tech industry. If investors believe Cook is constructive on crypto, it could spur capital linkages between tech and crypto assets. Behind the simple “I own crypto” may lie a resonance and confirmation of crypto’s legitimacy and mainstream prospects — possibly prompting a cascade of structural shifts: 1. Attracting more HNW individuals & tech executives to allocate As a representative figure, Cook’s behavior has a “demonstration effect.” Other tech executives and industry elites may be more willing to add crypto to their private portfolios, rather than confining the discussion to financial circles. 2. Blurring the crypto–traditional asset boundary Apple is an emblem of the tech world. If Cook’s gradually “normalized” attitude toward crypto is perceived as routine personal allocation, it could weaken the “outsider” label between crypto and traditional assets, bringing more cross-over capital. 3. Pressure on tech companies’ capital allocation If more tech executives build positions first at a personal level, crypto may come under corporate consideration later. Although Cook currently rules out corporate allocation, as regulation and markets mature, such behavior may become gradually acceptable. 4. Shifts in media and policy lenses Cook’s public admission may draw greater attention from regulators and mainstream media. They may examine whether to set stricter disclosure rules for corporate executives’ crypto holdings, as well as limits on tech companies entering crypto businesses. Conclusion Cook’s “I own crypto” is more than a simple confession; it’s a symbol: senior leaders of tech giants are shifting from “observers” to “participants.” While Apple still draws clear corporate boundaries, his personal move is enough to serve as a beacon for crypto’s move toward the mainstream. In the next five years, if more tech executives, traditional-finance CEOs, and asset-management giants begin allocating crypto privately or institutionally, it won’t just be the piling-up of consensus — it will be the solidification of a path. Once this path becomes irreversible, digital assets may genuinely enter the mainstream of capital allocation.

#Citi #Stablecoin #BankToken Over the past few years, stablecoins have played an almost “leading role” in crypto: whether matching orders on exchanges or powering collateralized lending in DeFi, stablecoins are the core infrastructure. Citi’s newly released report, “Stablecoins 2030,” stretches the outlook much further: by 2030, outstanding stablecoin supply could surpass $1.9 trillion in its base case — and, in an optimistic scenario, race toward $4 trillion. What does that mean in practice? Today’s stablecoin market is only about $150 billion. A seven-year, 20–30x expansion deserves a careful unpacking of the logic behind it. A Detailed Reading of Citi’s Latest Report: “Stablecoins 2030” 1. Market Size: From “Exchange Settlement Tool” to “Global Payment Layer” Citi offers two projections in the report: Base case: stablecoin supply reaches $1.9 trillion by 2030. Optimistic case: up to $4 trillion. If you then layer in velocity — how many times a single stablecoin unit can “turn over” in a year — Citi assumes future stablecoin velocity could reach 50x (close to traditional payment systems). Under that assumption: In the base case, stablecoins could support $100 trillion in annual transaction volume. In the optimistic case, $200 trillion per year. This is no longer about “stablecoins within a small circle,” but points directly to the global payment layer, cross-border settlement, and international trade. 2. Growth Drivers: Three Engines at Work Citi believes future stablecoin growth won’t be driven by a single force, but by three engines operating simultaneously, together forming a massive demand base. These three engines are the crypto-native ecosystem, e-commerce and digital-native enterprises, and offshore/international dollar demand. 1）Crypto-native ecosystem: stablecoins’ “home market” If you break down the history of stablecoins, they were almost tailor-made for crypto. Early on, Bitcoin’s price volatility was severe, and users lacked a tool “anchored to value” for pricing assets. Stablecoins emerged to become the trading counterparty, the hedging instrument, and the on-chain settlement currency. In today’s DeFi world, stablecoins are even more important: In lending markets, stablecoins are both collateral and borrowable assets. Users pledge ETH or BTC to borrow USDT/USDC for working capital. In derivatives, nearly all contract margins and settlements are stablecoin-denominated. In NFT and GameFi, stablecoins are not only the secondary-market settlement currency, but often the “exchange bridge” between in-game economies and the real world. In other words, even if stablecoins never entered traditional payments, the natural growth of the crypto-native ecosystem alone could expand them to the trillion-dollar scale. Citi’s report emphasizes that this demand is a “base layer” — solid and persistent. More critically, stablecoin usage exhibits a flywheel effect within crypto: The more people use stablecoins, the more DeFi protocols support them; The more protocols and use cases there are, the higher the demand and the faster the velocity. This positive feedback loop underpins stablecoins’ sustained growth over the next decade. 2) E-commerce and digital-native enterprises: the “expansion market” Citi sees the second driver coming from e-commerce, gaming, and social platforms. This is closer to everyday users and might even be the catalyst for true stablecoin breakout. Why? Because stablecoins are naturally suited for internet payments: Borderless: cross-border payments don’t need bank intermediaries — no 3–5 day settlement cycles. 24/7: they operate around the clock; weekends don’t pause transfers. Low cost: compared with expensive SWIFT cross-border remittances, stablecoin transfers are near zero cost. Imagine a cross-border e-commerce platform — say Shopee in Southeast Asia or Noon in the Middle East — embedding stablecoins into its payment stack. It could bypass complex FX controls and bank networks, directly realizing a “local currency ⇋ stablecoin ⇋ USD asset” loop. That’s a huge win for merchants and users alike. The same logic applies to gaming and social apps: Gaming economies need a “hard currency” that’s redeemable; stablecoins beat any virtual voucher on real-world value. Social apps can enable tipping and paid content via stablecoins, connecting directly with global users. More importantly, stablecoins could become a “platform settlement currency,” much like Alipay or PayPal. Once that kind of scaled application appears, stablecoins will leap from “a crypto-only currency” to a global internet payment tool. 3) Offshore/international dollar demand: the “hidden market” Finally — and this is something Citi particularly stresses — stablecoins are becoming the easiest way to access “digital dollars” globally. In many emerging markets, opening a USD account isn’t easy. Local banking is inefficient and FX controls are strict. For residents in such countries, holding USD and moving assets is often hard. Stablecoins provide a direct solution: Open a wallet address — no KYC required — and you can hold stablecoins. Stablecoins are transferable anytime and largely outside local capital controls. Liquidity is ample; conversion back to local currency is fast. This is especially crucial in high-inflation countries. In Argentina, Venezuela, Nigeria, and elsewhere, many people convert their salaries into stablecoins as soon as they’re paid, to avoid domestic currency depreciation. Here, stablecoins aren’t an investment — they are a lifeline for wealth preservation. This is what people call digital dollarization. As stablecoins spread globally, the trend may become more pronounced. It will not only meet individual needs but could also influence national FX structures. Taken together, these three forces form an inside-out expansion path: The crypto-native ecosystem is the core, the soil in which stablecoins first took root. E-commerce and digital enterprises are the expansion layer, bringing stablecoins into mainstream internet applications. Offshore dollar demand is the hidden market, giving stablecoins “must-have users” in emerging nations. Stack these three and you get Citi’s 2030 vision of $1.9–4 trillion in stablecoins. 3. A Powerful Rival: The Rise of Bank Tokens Stablecoins won’t be alone. A key point in Citi’s report is that bank tokens (tokenized deposits) may overtake stablecoins in transaction volume by 2030. Stablecoins’ edge: open, flexible, ideal for individuals and SMEs — anyone can use them. Bank tokens’ edge: backed by bank credit and easier to embed in enterprise finance and at-scale supply-chain payments. Citi projects that bank tokens’ annual transaction volume could reach $100–140 trillion by 2030 — higher than stablecoins. In other words, stablecoins will likely power the “internet-native, decentralized” economy, while bank tokens will handle “institutional, large-ticket” flows. The future may look like this: Stablecoins = digital cash, better for individuals and decentralized ecosystems. Bank tokens = digital deposits, better for enterprises and institutions. The two are not “zero-sum,” but “parallel prosperity.” 4. Regulation and Institutions: Catalysts for Mainstreaming Whether stablecoins can reach $4 trillion hinges on regulation and openness of payment networks. United States: moving forward with the GENIUS Act, and the SEC has launched the “Project Crypto” regulatory initiative. Europe: MiCAR (Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation) has gone live. Asia/Middle East: Hong Kong and the UAE are issuing stablecoin licenses to encourage compliant development. Perhaps most importantly, Visa and Mastercard have begun piloting stablecoin settlement on their networks. Once the payment giants truly open the pipes, stablecoin use cases could expand by orders of magnitude overnight. The Report’s Core Logic: Stablecoins Are About Fusion, Not Disruption Citi’s conclusion is clear: stablecoins won’t replace the dollar or disintermediate banks. Instead, together with bank tokens and CBDCs (central bank digital currencies) they will co-build a new digital-currency stack. For everyday users, stablecoins are “digital dollars you can use anytime. For enterprises, bank tokens may be more attractive, as they plug naturally into compliance, privacy, and existing finance systems. For regulators, a clear framework can move stablecoins from a “gray zone” to a compliant asset. In the end, the financial world of 2030 will likely be a three-pillar landscape: stablecoins + bank tokens + CBDC. Citi’s Outlook Is “Cautiously Optimistic” It recognizes that stablecoins will expand, while also underscoring the competitiveness of bank tokens. The trend suggests that the value of stablecoins is not to “replace the dollar,” but to supplement the dollar system. Put another way, the greatest significance of stablecoins isn’t to become a new currency, but to become the “lubricant” of global finance — appearing in cross-border payments, crypto finance, and e-commerce transactions. By 2030, whether you consider yourself a crypto user or not, you may well have used a stablecoin without realizing it. Conclusion Citi’s report effectively legitimizes stablecoins in the eyes of TradFi: they aren’t a fleeting speculative fad, but a class of infrastructure with a real shot at reaching the trillion-dollar level. The future of stablecoins is fusion, not replacement — not “disrupting the dollar,” but making the dollar more digital and more global.

#Plasma #stablecoin The crypto market never lacks overnight-riches legends. Recently, a certain whale (0x790c…1023) deposited 50,000,000 USDT into Plasma and received $2,700,000 in public-sale allocation. The whale bought 54,090,000 XPL at $0.05, now valued at $50,400,000, for an unrealized profit of over $47,700,000. This is the charm of crypto — irresistible to all. And the protagonist here is undoubtedly Plasma, the biggest hotspot in the stablecoin space lately, with extremely high community buzz. This isn’t just the profit myth of whale 0x790c…1023 — more importantly, it’s about the high returns and absolute fairness of the presale. According to Plasma, the project allocated 25 million tokens to all pre-deposit users, and these tokens were evenly distributed among all pre-depositors. In other words, whether you deposited $1 or $10,000, you received the same extra reward. This also means every participant in the pre-deposit program received $8,390 worth of XPL — even if they ultimately did not purchase XPL through the ICO. This approach undeniably drew a huge wave of followers and rapidly boosted Plasma’s popularity. Of course, market voices are always two-sided. Most intuitively, after Plasma announced that its mainnet beta was live, some regarded it as a new variable with the potential to change the on-chain payments and asset-flow landscape; others argued it was just short-term hype, unlikely to have a substantive impact in the near term. Such dual perspectives are beneficial for the healthy development of the crypto market. So, will Plasma’s mainnet beta become a catalyst for a long-term trend, or merely spark a brief wave of attention? This article dives in from technical, market, and economic dimensions. Background and Technical Logic of the Plasma Testnet Release As a type of Layer 2 solution, Plasma was originally proposed to address Ethereum mainnet’s scaling bottlenecks. Its core idea is to process transactions off-chain, submitting only necessary data and state to the main chain, thereby reducing mainnet load and increasing throughput. Compared to traditional Layer 2 tech, Plasma places greater emphasis on asset security and verifiability, giving it natural advantages in stablecoin and large-value payment scenarios. From the technical path perspective, launching the testnet marks that its infrastructure is entering a usable phase. The testnet’s main functions include: Verification of off-chain transaction processing capabilities: Execute complex logic off-chain to ease main-chain pressure; Verifiability of smart contracts and state storage: Ensure that even with off-chain operations, users’ funds remain verifiable and safe; Cross-chain and asset-bridging tests: Provide experimental scenarios for future interoperability with major chains and other Layer 2 ecosystems. Clearly, Plasma is not mere conceptual hype — it has taken an important step toward technical implementation. However, there is still a considerable distance from testnet release to full mainnet operations. The dev team needs multiple rounds of stress testing, bug fixes, and token-economic optimization to ensure system security. Market View: Plasma’s Potential Impact on the Crypto Ecosystem 1) Significance for the Stablecoin Ecosystem In recent years, stablecoins have increasingly penetrated global payments, DeFi, and cross-border settlement. From USDT and USDC to various new stablecoins, on-chain liquidity and transaction efficiency have become core bottlenecks. The Plasma mainnet beta provides a potential path for high-efficiency Layer 2 stablecoin flow. In theory, Plasma’s architecture can process thousands to tens of thousands of transactions instantly without main-chain confirmation, drastically reducing cost and latency. This is especially important for enterprise-grade payments and cross-border transactions. For example, if a large payment platform chooses to issue or settle stablecoins on Plasma, its settlement speed and fee advantage would clearly outperform models relying solely on Ethereum mainnet. This also implies that in DeFi or B2B scenarios, stablecoins with Layer 2 support are more likely to see adoption. Of course, the premise is that Plasma can indeed deliver its theoretical efficiency — something that only time can verify. 2) Competition with Existing Layer 2 Solutions The market already has numerous Layer 2s such as Optimism, Arbitrum, and zkSync. Whether Plasma can stand out depends on three key factors: Throughput and fees: Can Plasma’s processing power significantly outperform existing solutions, and are the fees competitive? Developer ecosystem: Can it attract enough DApps and protocols to deploy and build network effects? Cross-chain interoperability: In a multi-chain crypto world, can Plasma smoothly interoperate with Ethereum mainnet and other L1/L2 assets? At present, the testnet is primarily aimed at technical validation, so its short-term impact on the ecosystem is limited. But in the long run, if it can deliver on theoretical performance, the future is promising. 3) Investor Sentiment and the Market From market reactions, attention around relevant tokens/projects rose noticeably after the mainnet beta announcement. This is common in crypto: new tech releases often draw speculative capital. However, remember that projects at the testnet stage still carry high risk: untested mainnet under stress, potential technical vulnerabilities, or imperfect token economics. For retail investors, it’s better to observe and focus on execution progress rather than making decisions purely on short-term hype. Market Voices: Short Term or Long Term? 1) Analysis of Short-Term Hype Potential A hallmark of crypto markets is information-driven volatility. Every new technology or product release stokes short-term trading enthusiasm. Plasma’s testnet/“mainnet beta” launch is no exception. To judge whether this is short-term hype, consider: Information diffusion speed: Social media, crypto communities, and exchange notices can quickly boost attention, but often via concept-driven rather than real transactional value; Participant structure: Retail and speculative capital likely dominates, leading to short-term swings, while whales and institutions focus more on long-term technical value; Actual on-chain volume and ecosystem rollout: At the testnet stage, on-chain activity is limited and DApps have not rolled out at scale, so price moves are more sentiment-driven than value-driven. All told, short-term speculation is likely. Whether it evolves into a long-term trend depends on factors such as full mainnet launch timing, ecosystem partners joining, and on-chain activity/volume data. 2) Analysis of Long-Term Variable Potential Despite the short-term speculation risk, Plasma could still become a long-term variable. The core logic: Addressing blockchain scaling pain points: If Plasma succeeds at large-scale processing, its low-cost, high-efficiency traits will be a lasting draw for stablecoins and large-value payments; Technical innovation and network effects: Unlike some existing L2s, Plasma emphasizes asset-security verification and cross-chain interoperability, potentially fostering a new developer ecosystem; Compliance and enterprise adoption prospects: For enterprises seeking compliant on-chain payments, high-efficiency L2 settlement has real demand, which may underpin long-term value. Historically, similar technologies take 6–18 months from testnet to mainnet to ecosystem rollout. The market may fluctuate during this period, but technical maturity and real-world application will ultimately determine long-term impact. Key Points to Watch for Plasma’s Testnet/Mainnet Beta Follow technical execution: As noted, whether the tech lands is the core — beyond a testnet/beta banner, keep an eye on stress-test results, bug-fix cadence, and mainnet timelines; Track ecosystem building: The integration of DApps, wallets, and payment platforms will directly affect Plasma’s use cases and value; Control risk: Short-term price moves may be speculative — retail investors should avoid blind chasing and maintain risk awareness; Maintain a long-term view: For institutions and pros, focus on L2 potential in payments, stablecoins, and cross-chain applications as a basis for judging long-term value. Conclusion The release of Plasma’s mainnet beta is both a technical milestone and a new market hotspot. Technically, it has the potential to alleviate on-chain congestion and provide low-cost solutions for stablecoins and high-frequency payments. From a market standpoint, short-term speculation is hard to avoid, but long-term value still depends on technical delivery and ecosystem completeness. Investors should stay objective and rational — neither chase blindly due to fleeting hype nor overlook potential opportunities because of short-term volatility.

#BlackSeptember #Bitcoin #Fed “Black September” is a meme most of us know well. Each time the calendar flips to September, Bitcoin, Ethereum, and the broader market seem cursed: weak rallies, frequent sell-offs. As the most infamous risk month of the year, September’s poor performance isn’t unique to crypto — traditional markets like equities can’t escape it either. Amusingly, the phrase “Black September” actually originated from the stock market. This September delivered on that reputation again. Bitcoin broke key support, on-chain stablecoins rushed for the exits, and fear spread. As some joked: “Black September isn’t a legend — it’s a required course every year.” The September Curse: Seasonal Anxiety in Crypto 1. The market memory of an “unlucky September” Historical stats in U.S. equities show September has the lowest average monthly return, and the effect is even more pronounced in crypto. From 2017 to 2022, Bitcoin posted negative returns six Septembers in a row. Although this seasonal effect eased somewhat in 2023 and 2024, the “September curse” remains deeply etched in investors’ minds. Come September, even a small gust of wind can amplify fear. This time, BTC slipping below $110,000 and ETH breaking under $3,900 is a textbook case of “historical shadow + market expectations” applying dual pressure. 2. Why does September so often underperform? • Tighter liquidity: Overseas markets enter earnings season, capital tilts toward traditional assets, and risk appetite falls. • Macro policy sensitivity: The Fed, ECB, and others often hold rate meetings in September; markets are hypersensitive to rate expectations. • Market psychology: History nudges investors to take profits or cut exposure early, creating a self-fulfilling loop. In other words, September is often not a “trend-deciding month,” but a “risk-pre-release month.” Behind the BTC and ETH Plunge: Liquidations Are Only the Surface This sell-off once again reveals crypto’s brutality. Many headlines emphasized “longs and shorts liquidated” in derivatives. Data show over 250,000 traders liquidated in 24 hours, with more than $1.1 billion wiped out. On the tape, it looks like a classic leverage cascade. But pinning the drop solely on liquidations only grasps the surface. What truly drove the abrupt downturn was an imbalance of inflows vs. outflows, cooling narratives, a tighter macro backdrop, and the stacking effect of black swans. 1. Institutional flows cool: ETF net outflows exacerbate the drop Over the past two years, “institutionalization” was the market’s biggest certainty. Spot ETFs opened the gates for Wall Street capital, directly propelling BTC and ETH to new highs. Many investors even viewed ETFs as a “base-position backstop.” But in September, the tide turned: • ETH ETFs recorded multiple consecutive days of net outflows, totaling over $500 million. • Bitcoin ETFs also posted net outflows three times this week, totaling around $480 million. Translation: institutions trimmed risk and left. The “backstop bid” vanished. Remember, ETFs are merely pipes for money in and out — they don’t only flow one way. Plenty of retail traders fantasized that “with ETFs, it won’t drop,” but reality shows that when institutions see risk > return, they pull liquidity too. In short, ETFs are a double-edged sword. They can bring incremental capital, and they can also amplify downside when the market cools. 2. The DAT narrative cools: valuations re-anchor to NAV Beyond institutions, “narratives” powered this summer’s rally — especially the Digital Asset Treasury (DAT) model, which gave ETH a sizable premium. • In the hot July–August phase: weighted mNAV for ETH DATs once exceeded 5×, capital poured in, and volumes hit records. • By September: that story’s pull faded quickly; mNAV fell back near 1×, with almost no premium left. • Related projects’ on-chain activity dropped sharply; investor enthusiasm ebbed fast. This means the market is de-story-fying, re-anchoring capital to true net asset value (NAV). Without narrative support, ETH struggled to maintain lofty valuations — so a break below $3,900 became natural. It’s a reminder that crypto narratives are highly cyclical. From “AI + Crypto” to “RWA” to “DAT,” each story has a shelf life. When the buzz fades and capital turns rational, prices correct. 3. Macro factors: The Fed’s uncertainty Macro remains an inescapable variable. Recent U.S. data stayed strong — especially jobs and consumption — reinforcing views of a resilient economy. The fallout: • Hopes for an October rate cut were clearly reduced. • The Fed is split internally on whether to cut this year. • The U.S. dollar index strengthened, and global risk appetite fell. For BTC and ETH, that’s undeniably bearish. In global investors’ eyes, they remain high-volatility risk assets. When rate expectations wobble and the dollar strengthens, capital naturally flows out of crypto and back into more stable assets. Put simply, macro headwinds formed the essential backdrop for this drop. Without macro “help,” the negatives from ETF outflows and narrative cooling might not have been amplified so quickly. 4. Black swans: On-chain attacks fan the flames To make matters worse, recent security incidents on-chain helped fuel panic: • UXLINK was attacked, losing $11.3 million, alongside malicious minting. • On BNB Chain, GAIN was exploited for 5 billion tokens, and the price instantly plunged 90%. • The Hyperdrive stablecoin protocol account was attacked; all money markets were paused. By dollar value, these weren’t massive. But amid fragile sentiment, any black swan can be magnified into a stampede. Especially for retail, seeing “hack, crash, mint” triggers first-order selling. In that sense, exploits acted as fuses that fully released fear. In sum, calling this BTC and ETH plunge a derivatives liquidation cascade only captures the result, not the cause. The core logic was a turn in flows and sentiment: • Institutions withdrew via ETFs, draining liquidity. • The DAT narrative cooled, and valuations reverted to rational anchors. • Macro tightened, with Fed policy expectations unstable. • Black swans added fuel, amplifying panic. For investors, it’s another reminder: no single variable explains crypto price action. To understand volatility, you must track capital flows, narrative strength, and the macro — otherwise it’s easy to be fooled by appearances. Can October Bring a Turnaround? Here’s What the Market Is Saying 1. The bull case • Seasonality reversal: History shows October is often a “turnaround month” for Bitcoin, with mostly positive returns in recent years. • Policy catalysts: The U.S. Congress and regulators are advancing market-structure legislation for crypto; passage could lift confidence. • Institutional holding trend intact: VanEck data show 290+ companies hold a combined $163+ billion in BTC; institutional demand remains a long-term support. • A new ETH narrative: As treasury assets tilt toward ETH allocation, ETH could become the next institutional favorite. 2. The cautious view • Technicals not yet stabilized: BTC’s key support is near $109,500; a break could trigger a second leg down. • Unsteady flows: ETF inflows remain choppy; another stretch of net outflows would keep pressure on. • Macro risks linger: The Fed’s policy uncertainty is still the Sword of Damocles overhead. Conclusion This BTC and ETH sell-off once again validated the power of the September curse. In the short run, the market may keep chopping in fear; in the long run, crypto’s foundational logic hasn’t changed: • BTC remains the world’s strongest store-of-value asset. • ETH remains the most promising on-chain economic infrastructure. • Black September is a cyclical wobble point, not the end of the trend. After weathering storms, healthier rallies can follow. October just might be the next rebound’s starting point.

#BlackRock #Bitcoin #ETF According to market disclosures, the world’s largest asset manager BlackRock has filed in the state of Delaware, USA, for a Bitcoin Premium Income ETF (iShares Bitcoin Premium Income ETF). Keep in mind, BlackRock is already a giant in the global ETF market — its iShares product family manages over a trillion dollars. Previously, the Bitcoin spot ETF it championed was approved in the United States and was regarded as a “watershed” event for the crypto market in 2024. Now, it is once again attempting to launch a Premium Income ETF, which clearly sends a signal: traditional financial institutions are continuously expanding Bitcoin-related financial derivative products and bringing them into more complex and diversified investment frameworks. So here’s the question: what is a Premium Income ETF? How is it different from a regular ETF? What does it mean for retail investors and the crypto market? Next, let’s discuss the logic of a Premium Income ETF in the simplest terms. Click to register SuperEx Click to download the SuperEx APP Click to enter SuperEx CMC Click to enter SuperEx DAO Academy — Space Let’s first review some ETF basics 1. What is an ETF? ETF stands for Exchange Traded Fund. In essence, it is a basket of assets that trades on an exchange like a stock. For the average investor: when you buy an ETF, you’re effectively buying a basket of assets rather than a single underlying security. Its advantages are simple: strong liquidity, low cost, and high transparency. In the crypto market, we are already familiar with Bitcoin spot ETFs: they are backed by custodians that actually hold Bitcoin, and each share of the ETF represents a certain quantity of BTC. 2. Types of ETFs Index ETFs: Track an index (e.g., S&P 500 ETFs). Sector ETFs: Focus on a specific sector (e.g., tech ETFs, gold ETFs). Crypto ETFs: Use digital assets such as Bitcoin and Ethereum as the underlying. What we are discussing today — Premium Income ETFs — falls under innovative ETFs. They do not merely replicate price movements but aim to generate additional return for investors through a special income mechanism. What is a Premium Income ETF? Simply put, a Premium Income ETF is a fund vehicle that captures “premium” differentials to earn additional income. It’s not just “buying a basket of assets”; instead, on top of the ups and downs of the underlying asset, it allows investors to obtain an extra layer of “income enhancement.” Let’s break it down: 1) The meaning of “premium” “Premium” is a common phenomenon in financial markets. When an ETF’s market price is higher than the actual net asset value (NAV) of its underlying holdings, a premium arises. Conversely, if the price is below NAV, that’s a discount. In formula form: ETF price > actual asset value = premium ETF price < actual asset value = discount This is not uncommon, especially when trading liquidity is insufficient, investor demand is overly concentrated, or certain market frictions cause supply–demand imbalances. For Bitcoin, for example, when retail investors chase spot ETFs aggressively, it’s quite possible for the ETF price to temporarily exceed the actual value of the Bitcoin it holds. 2) The logic of a Premium Income ETF A regular ETF is typically “passive tracking,” i.e., it replicates the performance of the underlying asset to give investors indirect exposure. A Premium Income ETF goes a step further: it proactively captures the premium spread, converting the extra pricing differential created by market supply–demand mismatches into actual income. Common approaches include: Selling options: The fund uses existing holdings to sell calls or puts and collect option premiums from the market; Arbitrage trading: If a price gap exists between the ETF and the underlying, the fund locks in income through cross-market trades; Structured income distribution: The fund converts the premium portion into additional cash flow and distributes it to shareholders. In this way, investors don’t just follow the asset’s ups and downs; they can enjoy a dual-engine model of “underlying asset return + premium income.” 3) A plain-English example Suppose you buy a basket of apples with a market value of 100 USD, but due to short supply and strong demand, your “Apple ETF” can sell for 105 USD. The 5 USD difference is the premium. If the fund manager returns this extra income to investors via distributions or product design, your actual return is higher than simply buying apples. In other words, a Premium Income ETF helps you monetize the market’s non-rational premium into cash flow in your pocket. 4) Why do we need Premium Income ETFs? Investors typically pursue Premium Income ETFs for three reasons: Enhanced returns: In flat markets, a Premium Income ETF can deliver more return than a plain ETF; Lower barriers: It’s hard for ordinary investors to operate in options or arbitrage markets, but a fund can bundle these strategies for you; Flexible allocation: For small accounts, Premium Income ETFs are a convenient way to access “an extra layer of yield.” Of course, they are not perfect. Premiums don’t always exist — once the market becomes rational or liquidity is ample, the extra income can diminish or disappear; and the derivatives strategies used by Premium Income ETFs may at times increase volatility and risk. The uniqueness of a Bitcoin Premium Income ETF Combining “Premium Income ETF” with Bitcoin creates a very interesting chemical reaction. 1. Why is Bitcoin suitable for a Premium Income ETF? Large supply–demand swings: As a scarce asset, Bitcoin is prone to premiums or discounts. Developed derivatives markets: With futures, options, and perpetuals available, fund managers can capture premiums via arbitrage. Uneven global trading: Pricing differs by country and exchange, providing room for arbitrage. 2. Sources of income A Bitcoin Premium Income ETF might obtain income by: Selling call options → collecting option premium; Capturing ETF trading premiums → market-making and arbitrage; Exploiting futures–spot spreads → hedging to lock in returns. 3. Risk points Premiums aren’t persistent; once the market normalizes, the extra income may vanish. Using derivatives for arbitrage can introduce leverage-related risks. Complexity for retail: Structurally more complex than a plain spot ETF, with a steeper learning curve. What does a Premium Income ETF mean for ordinary investors? 1. Benefits Higher return potential: You don’t just track Bitcoin — you may also share in premium/arbitrage-driven income. Lower operational difficulty: No need to run complex arbitrage yourself — the fund does it for you. A new passive-income channel: It can attract those interested in Bitcoin who also want “extra yield.” 2. Risks Uncertain income: If premiums are unstable, income will fluctuate. Product complexity: Investors may not fully understand its mechanics, creating a gap between expectations and reality. Market risk: At its core it’s still Bitcoin exposure — sharp price declines still mean losses. The market impact of BlackRock’s move 1. For traditional finance BlackRock’s move indicates: Bitcoin-related financial products are becoming increasingly rich and varied; ETF innovation is no longer satisfied with “buy spot,” and is expanding into yield-enhancement products; Traditional institutions are actively exploring how to package crypto assets into more attractive investment tools. 2. For the crypto market Improved liquidity: A Premium Income ETF may attract more capital inflows and increase Bitcoin trading demand. Greater price stability: Fund arbitrage behavior could reduce price discrepancies across venues. More active derivatives: Options and futures markets may see greater institutional participation. 3. For investor psychology Retail will become more familiar with Bitcoin derivatives, moving beyond just “buy coin/sell coin.” Long-term investors may seek dual returns — steady cash flow plus capital appreciation. But chasing risk can emerge — if expectations for extra yield get too high, bubbles may form. Conclusion From the Bitcoin spot ETF to today’s Bitcoin Premium Income ETF, BlackRock is continuously pushing the boundaries of crypto financial products. The essence of a Premium Income ETF is to let investors share not only in Bitcoin’s price movements but also in the extra income generated by arbitrage. Behind this lies a key trend: crypto assets are being “second-engineered” by traditional finance — becoming more investable and more mainstream. For ordinary investors, understanding these concepts matters more than blindly chasing hot themes. After all, being able to buy coins is one skill; choosing the right financial product is a different level altogether

#UXLINK #UXLINKHack In the early hours of September 23, 2025, UXLINK — hailed as the “largest Web3 social platform” — suffered a severe security incident. Losses exceeded tens of millions of dollars, the token plunged over 70%, and the attacker even minted 1 billion UXLINK on-chain in a dramatic twist. Before the exploit, UXLINK had been a star in Web3 social: Mar 2023: UXLINK Dapp launched on Telegram, enabling social asset management and trading inside groups. Mar 2024: Raised $9M led by OKX Ventures. May 2024: Raised another $5M led by SevenX, HashKey Capital, and INCE Capital; registered users surpassed 10M. Jul 2024: Listed on multiple major exchanges; user growth and traction accelerated. Jun 2025: Outperformed on Upbit, topping gainers lists at times. With its Web3 + Social Finance (SocialFi) positioning, UXLINK was seen as a potential “social gateway” app. One hack dimmed the halo overnight. This incident quickly rocked the crypto space. Investors, exchanges, security firms, and even regulators paid close attention. This report reviews the attack end-to-end, analyzes the vulnerabilities and likely root causes, and examines the impact on tokenomics, user trust, and the broader industry. Timeline: From Suspicious Transactions to On-Chain Minting Phase 1: The First Signs According to security firm Cyvers, at around 00:43 on September 23, suspicious on-chain activity involving UXLINK was detected. The attacker first used delegatecall to strip admin privileges, then invoked addOwnerWithThreshold to tamper with ownership of UXLINK’s multisig. Funds were moved quickly thereafter: 4,000,000 USDT 500,000 USDC 3.7 WBTC 25 ETH Assets were bridged and swapped to DAI or ETH, then dispersed across multiple addresses. Minutes later, another suspicious address received 10,000,000 UXLINK (~$3M) and began selling. Phase 2: Official Confirmation and Initial Response Roughly an hour later, UXLINK confirmed on X (Twitter):“We have identified a security issue in our multisig wallet, resulting in unauthorized transfers to CEXs and DEXs. We have contacted major platforms to urgently freeze related assets and are working with law enforcement and security partners to trace funds.” The team added that: A large portion of stolen assets had been frozen; PeckShield and other firms were engaged to investigate; A clear compensation and account recovery plan would follow; User self-custody wallets were not directly compromised. While this calmed some nerves, what followed was even more unusual. Phase 3: The Attacker Mints 1,000,000,000 UXLINK On-chain data then showed the attacker unauthorizedly minted 1 billion UXLINK. Given that UXLINK’s original total supply was 1 billion, this instantly doubled supply and severely diluted existing holders. Complicating matters, the attacker sold across multiple CEXs and on-chain venues, reportedly cashing out around 6,732 ETH (~$28.1M) in short order. Ironically, the attacker appears to have been “hacked back” during a secondary incident — 542 million UXLINK was siphoned by a phishing contract. Funds then became highly obfuscated — worthy of a Hollywood script. Price Crash and Exchange Actions The attack cratered UXLINK’s market price. It briefly fell to $0.08529, down 71.9% in 24 hours — an abrupt cliff for an asset that had recently shined across exchanges. Korean majors Upbit and Bithumb flagged UXLINK as a “trading caution” asset: Upbit suspended deposits/withdrawals; Both exchanges said they would conduct technical and compliance reviews before deciding on resumption. Exchanges moved fast to prevent further user losses — and, implicitly, signaled concerns about the token’s economic integrity. Root Cause: The Multisig Trap After the incident, SlowMist co-founder Cosine wrote on X:“Most likely several private keys related to UXLINK’s Safe multisig were leaked. The attacker modified the multisig owners and moved funds.” Multisig wallets are considered a high-security standard, requiring multiple keys to authorize transactions. Here, key management failed: Some keys were likely leaked; Privilege and access controls were weak; Monitoring and alerting were insufficient, allowing rapid exfiltration. The takeaway: even with multisig, poor key distribution and governance can become a systemic risk. Deeper Impacts 1) Tokenomics Shock Minting 1B new UXLINK wasn’t just a technical flaw — it shattered the token model. Original total supply: 1B After attacker mint: 2B Circulating supply doubled, diluting existing holders; Confidence collapsed; the price nosedived. This mirrors hyperinflation in traditional finance. A recovery is nearly impossible without immediate token swaps or model resets. 2) Trust Erosion Despite assurances that user wallets weren’t affected, trust was badly damaged: Can funds be recovered? Was key leakage due to mismanagement? Will compensation be fair and timely? Web3 projects rest on community consensus. Once trust breaks, even strong backers and user metrics can’t easily repair it. 3) The Lesson: Multisig ≠ Absolute Security Key points the incident underscores: Multisig is not a silver bullet — private keys remain the weakest link. Many teams over-index on “we have multisig” while neglecting: Secure key storage and ops hygiene; Robust privilege separation; Regular audits and red-team drills. Expect an industry-wide re-evaluation of multisig + key management practices. 4) Blowback on SocialFi UXLINK is a flagship SocialFi project. The hack casts a shadow over the vertical. Expect more scrutiny of: Tokenized social relationships — is there a bubble? Real asset safety for users; Team security governance competency. Near-term, SocialFi may cool as investors demand stronger security baselines. UXLINK Announces a Token Swap Plan UXLINK says it will initiate a token swap and work with CEX partners to restore confidence. The path is arduous: How to ensure new tokens won’t face similar exploits? How to compensate existing users fairly? How to rebuild credibility with both community and investors? If these aren’t resolved convincingly, UXLINK risks the fate of many hacked projects: gradual marginalization. Industry Reminder: Security Is the Bedrock No matter the funding or user scale, a single lapse can wipe out years of effort. Blockchains remove the need for trust, but a project’s governance and security discipline ultimately decide its durability. By contrast, some top exchanges and platforms have invested heavily in multi-layered security. SuperEx, for example, established early: User-controlled assets (self-custody integration); Dynamic identity verification; Multi-signature systems; Real-time risk monitoring; Regular third-party audits with leading security firms. This multi-dimension approach has helped SuperEx keep user assets 100% secure and maintain platform stability through market turmoil and threat waves. Conclusion The UXLINK hack is more than a single project’s crisis — it’s a security siren for the entire Web3 industry. No matter how dazzling the tech or financial engineering, long-term success hinges on a simple question:Can you keep user assets truly safe?

#Hyperliquid #Aster #DEX The competition among decentralized exchanges (DEXs) has never been this fierce. In September 2025, a seemingly ordinary post lit up market sentiment: former Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao (CZ) shared a price chart that wasn’t Bitcoin or BNB. The chart’s subject was Aster, a newly launched token. With CZ’s brief “Nice work! Keep it up!,” Aster surged 400% in a short span and instantly became the market’s focal point. Traders realized this wasn’t merely a congratulatory note — it was a direct challenge to the rising DEX Hyperliquid. Over the past two years, Hyperliquid has leveraged a home-grown Layer 1 chain and deep liquidity to grow from a fringe player into a “CEX killer,” grabbing as much as 70% market share. With Aster’s sudden rise, that balance may be about to shift. This is more than a platform face-off — it’s a new chapter in the DEX vs. CEX power struggle. Aster’s Arrival Wasn’t Accidental — it’s a Calculated Move According to public information, Aster is the result of a merger between two DeFi protocols: Astherus (a multi-asset liquidity hub) and APX Finance (a decentralized perpetuals venue). The combined platform spans BNB Chain, Ethereum, Solana, and Arbitrum, positioning itself as a multi-chain DEX. Crucially, Aster enjoys long-term support from YZi Labs (formerly Binance Labs). As early as late 2024, Binance Capital invested in Aster’s predecessor and brought it into its incubation pipeline. As Hyperliquid’s share kept climbing, Aster was pushed to the front as a Binance-aligned counterweight to the “new DEX champion.” CZ’s public backing signals two things: Binance won’t sit out the DEX race. Hyperliquid won’t reign unchallenged. Behind it is an intensifying contest between a CEX giant and an ascendant DEX. Aster’s Technical and Product Highlights Aster’s rapid rise isn’t just about CZ’s nod — the product and design choices carry real competitive weight. 1. Unified Liquidity with Cross-Chain Support Traditional DEX pain point: fragmented liquidity and clunky, manual bridging. Aster aggregates cross-chain order book depth, letting users trade seamlessly across multiple networks without manual bridges. 2. Dual-Mode Trading UI Simple Mode: one-tap trading with MEV protection, for lightweight users. Pro Mode: full order book + advanced charting, for professional traders. This split lowers entry barriers while serving power users. 3. Hidden Orders Aster’s “hidden orders” resemble dark pools in TradFi, helping mitigate front-running and liquidation games — perennial issues in on-chain trading. 4. Yielding Collateral Beyond USDT, users can post asBNB (liquid-staking BNB) or USDF (yielding stablecoin) as margin — so collateral earns yield while securing positions, boosting capital efficiency. 5. Product Perimeter Expansion: Stock Perps Aster lists U.S. equity perpetuals, with some pairs offering leverage up to 1001x — pulling traditional assets into the on-chain arena. Net-net, Aster is pursuing “liquidity unification + product innovation” rather than cloning Hyperliquid. Hyperliquid vs. Aster: A Collision of Two Paths To grasp this contest, compare their core differences — and the industry logic beneath. 1) Architecture: Closed High-Speed vs. Open Multi-Chain Hyperliquid chose a self-built Layer 1, independent of Ethereum and others — an end-to-end chain “built for trading.” Pros: Extreme performance; CEX-like matching speeds on-chain Unified execution/settlement/data for a tight UX Strong control, fewer external dependencies Cons: A relatively closed ecosystem; slower to attract outside innovation; limited extensibility Aster embraced multi-chain integration (Ethereum/BNB/Solana/Arbitrum). Pros: Natural openness; lower barriers for diverse users Cross-chain liquidity scheduling High compatibility with existing DeFi tools Cons: Much higher technical complexity: bridge security, book synchronization latency, MEV defenses, etc. In short: Hyperliquid ≈ Apple-style closed ecosystem; Aster ≈ Android-style open platform. 2) Market Share: Fortifying vs. Catching Up Hyperliquid remains the dominant decentralized perps venue with ~70% share, >$15B in open interest, and roughly 200k DAUs — clear network effects. Aster is newer. In just six months it notched $514B in cumulative volume and peaked near $2B TVL (recently easing to $655M). For a cold-start phase, that’s meaningful traction. So: Hyperliquid: in moat-building mode — locking in with stable users and revenue Aster: in hyper-growth mode — leaning on capital + narrative; moat still forming One is defending the city, the other storming the gates. 3) Leverage & Product Perimeter: Divergent Risk Appetites Hyperliquid caps leverage at 40x — seemingly conservative, but it reduces cascade liquidations in tail events and stabilizes system health. Its brand is the “safe choice for professionals.” Aster takes the opposite tack: equity perps up to 1001x — a lightning rod in crypto. Fans say it meets extreme-risk demand and pulls in high-octane capital; critics call it “casino logic.” Practically, this reflects target segments: Hyperliquid: institutions and systematic/quant players seeking durability Aster: retail, short-term punters, and high-volatility seekers That user mix affects long-term ecosystem stability. 4) Token Design: Deflation Logic vs. Community-First Hyperliquid’s HYPE skews “equity-like.” With $1B+ annual fee revenue, the team buys back/burns, creating a dividend-ish + deflation profile — attractive to institutions and value-oriented holders. Aster’s ASTER leans “community experiment.” Of the 8B supply, 53.5% goes to the community via incentives, governance, and liquidity programs. Less focus on pure deflation; more on broad distribution to amplify network effects. Trade-offs: HYPE: stable, cash-flow backed, but thinner decentralization narrative ASTER: high community engagement, but more speculative price volatility Hence, Hyperliquid tends to attract big, steady money, while Aster stays hot with retail communities. Bottom line: Hyperliquid: Own chain + high performance + steady model → institutional/pro path Aster: Multi-chain + high leverage + community flywheel → narrative/user-count blitz This duel mirrors DeFi’s broader fork in the road: closed & fast vs. open & multi-chain, steady growth vs. high-risk expansion. The eventual winner might hinge less on short-term share and more on who adapts to regulation and evolving demand. Conclusion: Keep a Cool Head in the “DEX War” Aster’s emergence has undeniably energized the DEX track. It embodies both a CEX giant’s counterpunch and a new DeFi narrative. Yet for both Hyperliquid and Aster, long-term value will still be determined by real user demand and sustainable business models. For investors, avoid being swayed by sudden pumps or slick marketing. Return to fundamentals: Does the platform sustain meaningful, sticky volume? Is the model durable across cycles and stress events? Can the token truly capture and compound ecosystem growth? The DEX war has begun. The outcome is far from decided.

#DAT #Ethereum #Solana What is DAT? In short, DAT (Digital Asset Treasury) means an enterprise or institution adds digital assets (such as BTC, ETH, SOL) to its balance sheet as part of its strategic reserves. Unlike ETFs — passive investment vehicles — DAT emphasizes active management, boosting returns via staking, financing, derivatives trading, and more. This model was pioneered by Bitcoin. Since MicroStrategy announced in 2020 that it would hold BTC in its treasury, the logic of corporates buying crypto as reserves has gained market acceptance. With Bitcoin ETFs approved in 2024, institutional allocation demand has been fully unleashed. However, the Bitcoin treasury playbook is relatively simple — buy and hold — leaving less room for advanced asset engineering. Ethereum’s DAT builds on that and layers in richer “yield generation.” Ethereum DAT: From “Storage” to “Value-Add” Ethereum’s advantages are clear — higher volatility and staking capability — making it the top DAT pick after BTC. Data shows over 4.1 million ETH have been placed in various institutional treasuries, with a market value above $17.6 billion, accounting for 3.39% of ETH’s total supply. BitMine, SharpLink Gaming, and The Ether Machine together hold positions worth over $10 billion, effectively dominating the top end of institutional ETH treasuries. Why has Ethereum’s DAT moved faster? 1）Volatility creates financing room ETH’s historical volatility exceeds BTC’s, opening the door for arbitrage and derivatives strategies. ETH treasury companies often collateralize assets to issue convertible notes on better terms, lowering financing costs. 2）Staking generates steady cash flow Unlike Bitcoin, post-Merge Ethereum (PoS) lets ETH holders earn staking yield. Institutional DAT operators aren’t just hoarding — they can lock in recurring on-chain cash flows, turning ETH into a bond-like asset. 3）Ecosystem depth DeFi, NFTs, and RWA rely heavily on Ethereum, making ETH not just a reserve asset but also the fuel of a financial ecosystem. This network effect gives ETH DAT outsized strategic value. In essence, ETH DAT has evolved from “simple reserves” to “financial engineering,” offering listed companies a new capital-markets playbook. Solana DAT: The Rise of a New Force 1) From follower to breakout Even as ETH DAT boomed, Solana began catching Wall Street’s eye. Latest figures show 17 entities have established SOL treasuries, totaling 11.739 million SOL — about $2.84 billion — or 2.04% of total supply. This means Solana has moved from “edge chain” to the third major institutional allocation target, after BTC and ETH. Forward Industries, Helius Medical Technologies (HSDT), and Upexi have all named Solana a strategic asset. Capital heavyweight Galaxy Digital has doubled down as well, adding $400 million of SOL for Forward Industries. 2) DAT 2.0: The appeal of staking yield Another highlight of Solana DAT is attractive staking yields. So far, around 585,000 SOL — worth over $100 million — have been staked at an average yield of 6.86%. Upexi raised holdings from 73,500 SOL to 1.8 million SOL and staked nearly all of it, expecting ~$26 million in annual cash flow. In other words, Solana DAT is shifting from pure “reserve” to active value-add, akin to an interest-bearing asset in TradFi. 3) Wall Street logic: Smaller market cap, bigger elasticity Compared with BTC and ETH, SOL’s market cap is smaller (~$116 billion, roughly 1/20 of BTC). That means the same dollar inflow can move SOL’s price far more than BTC/ETH. For example, Forward Industries’ $1.6 billion injection into SOL would be equivalent to ~$33 billion of buying pressure in BTC terms. Given supply-demand dynamics, SOL’s price elasticity is greater — appealing to institutions seeking higher upside. Solana’s Distinct Appeal 1) High-performance network: TradFi-grade speed and cost Solana uses a monolithic design — unlike Ethereum’s modular route (splitting execution and data layers via L2s). By integrating functions on a single L1, Solana delivers very high throughput — tens of thousands of TPS — and ultra-low fees (often <$0.01 per transaction). For Wall Street, this is critical. Institutional settlement is highly sensitive to speed and cost. With recent upgrades, Solana cut transaction confirmation to ~150 ms, approaching Web2-grade UX. For the first time, a blockchain’s settlement layer starts to look compatible with financial back-office systems. 2) Broad use cases: Multiple tracks, parallel momentum If Bitcoin is a reserve asset and Ethereum is financial Lego, Solana’s edge is multi-vertical applications. It has solid traction across payments, DeFi, NFTs, GameFi, SocialFi, and DePIN (decentralized physical infrastructure). In stablecoins and tokenized assets, Solana is emerging as a mainstream settlement network. USDC circulation on Solana is climbing fast; some cross-border payment firms already use Solana for clearing. In DePIN, Helium fully migrated to Solana — proof of its capacity for large-scale IoT workloads. This “horizontal bloom” means institutions aren’t betting on a single narrative, but on a consumer-grade super-platform potential. 3) Early institutional adoption: Huge upside ahead Currently, institutional SOL ownership is below 1%, far lower than ETH (~7%) and BTC (~16%). That doesn’t imply lack of recognition — rather, it shows massive runway. With Solana ETPs advancing and more corporates adding SOL to DAT, institutional penetration could rise quickly. Unlike BTC and ETH — already deeply held — Solana is a low-penetration “white canvas.” Each incremental institutional buy can have an outsized impact on price and market cap. Part of Wall Street’s interest is precisely this market-cap elasticity. At ~$116B, SOL is ~1/20 of BTC and 1/5 of ETH. The marginal price impact of equal-sized inflows is therefore much larger for SOL. In short, Solana enjoys a late-mover advantage with substantial incremental potential in the DAT lane. Net-net: Financial-grade performance, multi-track demand, and low starting institutional penetration combine to make Solana one of the most commercially compelling blockchains in Wall Street’s eyes. Conclusion From Bitcoin to Ethereum, and now to Solana, Digital Asset Treasuries (DAT) are reshaping the institutional crypto map. BTC brings the certainty of a reserve asset. ETH showcases the value-add of a financial asset. SOL represents the high-growth potential of a next-gen L1. As Forward Industries, Helius, Upexi and others keep adding, and a potential Solana ETF gathers momentum, Wall Street capital is flowing into Solana at unprecedented speed. This is not just an investment trend — it’s a vote by global capital on how the crypto market structure is evolving. Whether Solana can truly cement its place as Wall Street’s new favorite will depend on its ability to balance hyper-growth with long-term resilience.

#fed #Crypto This time the Fed didn’t disappoint the mainstream chorus — it finally cut rates. The Federal Reserve announced a 25 bps reduction, lowering the federal funds rate target range to 4.00%–4.25%. This is the first cut since last December and broadly in line with market expectations. While the move isn’t aggressive, the signal sent has jolted global asset markets: U.S. equities swung, gold dipped, the dollar weakened briefly then rebounded, and major crypto assets like Bitcoin and Ethereum moved sharply higher. This rate cut isn’t just the reactivation of a policy tool; it also marks a shift in the macro backdrop and liquidity regime. For crypto, will this be the catalyst for a new bull cycle — or merely a short-term tailwind? This piece breaks it down across four angles: The Fed’s policy backdrop and logic How rate cuts impact traditional markets Direct and indirect effects on crypto How investors can weigh opportunities and risks Why the Fed Cut: Slowing Growth and a Double Bind In its latest FOMC statement, the Fed emphasized several points: Employment growth has slowed, and the unemployment rate has ticked up; Inflation remains elevated, but the overall risk balance has shifted; The rate cut is about “risk management,” not outright stimulus. In other words, the Fed faces a two-sided dilemma: On one hand: a softening labor market raises downside risk to employment; keeping rates high could hasten recession. On the other: inflation isn’t fully subdued, and an overly hasty cut could rekindle price pressures. Chair Powell stated plainly that “there is no risk-free path for monetary policy.” The choice is about balancing jobs and inflation — less a one-way pivot than a calibrated trade-off. Notably, the dot plot suggests room for two more cuts this year, with cumulative easing possibly reaching 75 bps. Markets have pre-priced much of this, which has helped support risk assets. First-Order Reactions in Traditional Markets Right after the decision, major markets responded quickly: U.S. equities: Nasdaq fell as much as ~1% before recovering; the Dow rose. Equities remain cautious on the rate path, but easier liquidity expectations still underpin prices. U.S. Treasuries: Yields fell, then rose — signaling ongoing disagreement on growth and policy trajectories. Gold: Spiked, then faded as some investors took profits. U.S. dollar: Dipped, then rebounded — underscoring that a cut doesn’t guarantee a sustained USD downtrend. Takeaway: the market treats the cut as a supportive signal, but not necessarily the start of a broad, long-lasting bull — more a near-term repricing. What the Cut Means for Crypto 1) Lower Funding Costs Favor Risk Assets There’s no direct mechanical link between crypto and the fed funds rate, but liquidity and risk appetite transmit powerfully. A cut reduces funding costs: The opportunity cost of holding cash falls, raising the appeal of risk assets; Institutional capital can deploy leverage or financing more readily; With global liquidity expanding, non-sovereign assets like BTC tend to benefit. As several analyses note, since 2023 USD liquidity has tracked Bitcoin’s trend closely. If this cut is followed by two more, it could become a core variable pushing BTC to fresh highs. 2) Bitcoin’s “Digital Gold” Thesis Gets a Boost In high-rate regimes, income-producing instruments (deposits, bonds) look more attractive. As rates fall, those “risk-free” returns shrink and BTC’s scarcity and upside optionality stand out again. Commentators argue this wave of cheaper capital can buoy Bitcoin further. Historically, each liquidity-easing phase overlapped with BTC bull legs: Post-2020 pandemic QE: BTC made new ATHs; From 2023’s pause in hikes: BTC advanced past the $100k mark; Now: will this cut ignite a third crescendo? It’s a key watchpoint. 3) Tailwinds for ETH and Application-Layer Assets Unlike BTC, ETH and broader application assets (DeFi, GameFi, etc.) rely more on active capital. Lower rates mean cheaper financing and speculation — these segments may show higher beta than BTC. Some strategists note that beyond BTC, ETH and AI-adjacent themes could also be beneficiaries. The pattern from prior cycles often holds: BTC leads, then ETH and higher-risk assets follow. 4) Short-Term Risks: Over-Exuberance and Higher Volatility A cut isn’t a one-way ticket up: “Buy the rumor, sell the news” can trigger profit-taking once the decision lands; Crypto volatility can amplify rate-driven sentiment — fueling both stronger rallies and sharper pullbacks. Market color suggests BTC is facing strong resistance around $110k–$116k. A clean break and hold favors continuation; failure risks renewed range-trade chop. Medium-Term: What Will Determine If the Bull Extends? Pace and magnitude of cuts: If three cuts materialize this year, liquidity improves meaningfully; a renewed inflation flare-up turning the Fed hawkish could whiplash risk assets. Macro resilience: Cuts often imply slowing growth; if recession risk rises meaningfully, risk appetite can deteriorate — dragging on crypto. Regulatory climate: Liquidity helps, but policy remains the biggest wildcard. U.S. SEC/CFTC posture and global compliance paths will shape the speed of institutional inflows. Sentiment & cycle: With BTC already near historical highs (≈$118k), continuation requires fresh net inflows, not just rate-cut optics. Investor Playbook: Opportunity and Risk Positives: improving liquidity; potential for BTC/ETH to revisit or make new ATHs. Risks: overheated short-term sentiment and elevated volatility — chasing breakouts carries danger. Practical approach: Track key support/resistance on BTC/ETH; avoid emotion-driven chasing. Follow DeFi/AI/app-layer themes, but size positions conservatively. Long-term allocators can treat the easing cycle as a DCA/add window — ladder entries rather than lump-sum buys. Bottom Line This Fed cut is both a policy adjustment and a reshaping of global liquidity conditions. For crypto, it may be a powerful bull-market extender — but it doesn’t erase risk. As Powell said, there’s no risk-free policy path. Likewise, there’s no risk-free crypto allocation. In a market where inflows and volatility co-exist, investors must see the opportunity and keep their discipline. In short: rate cuts are a catalyst for crypto — but whether we make new highs will depend on the confluence of liquidity, policy, and sentiment.

#Pump.fun #Live-Stream If the keywords for the 2023–2024 crypto market were “meme-coin mania,” then the keyword for September 2025 is unmistakably the Pump.fun live-stream boom. On one side, the $PUMP token’s market cap has surpassed $8 billion, with creators’ cumulative income exceeding $19.3 million. On the other, the community is churning out 24/7 “reality-show-style” live events: from a “hard-mode raid” at a Los Angeles ballpark, to the “stolen hat and slap” episode at a fitness influencer’s gym, to charity narratives and Web2 influencers crossing over. Pump.fun has, in an unprecedented way, bound live content to token narratives. Does this wave herald a new chapter in Web3 innovation — or the next high-risk gamble? This piece breaks down the “live-to-earn gold rush” across data, project cases, model logic, risk factors, and future outlook. From “Chaotic Experiment” to “Phoenix Reborn”: Pump.fun’s Evolution To understand the roots of this craze, we have to rewind to Pump.fun’s first attempt in 2024. Back then, the platform rushed to fuse meme-coin issuance with real-time interaction, hastily launching a live-stream feature. The “chaotic experiment” ended in failure. With no effective moderation in place, content quality plunged; negativity spread; creators, lacking a stable income path, quickly churned. Under heavy community backlash, the platform yanked the feature. The failure proved that simply porting a Web2 model into Web3 doesn’t work. As Wendell Phillips said, “Failure is a great teacher if we will only learn from it.” Pump.fun clearly took that to heart. When it relaunched live streaming in early 2025, it rolled out a series of pivotal upgrades. Beyond tighter moderation and KYC to address quality, it introduced a game-changer — Project Ascend. Project Ascend is a tiered creator-fee system. Instead of relying on one-off tips or gifts, it continuously shares ~1% of the live token’s market cap with creators. In other words, as long as a project’s market cap grows, creators keep earning — without needing to dump tokens or beg for oversized tips like traditional Web2 streamers. This creates a closed economic loop: viewers buy tokens to support creators → token market cap rises → creators earn ongoing revenue → creators reinvest in better content or buybacks → token price gets another lift. With sustainable incentives, creators can treat streaming as a career, not a gamble. On the strength of these upgrades, Pump.fun’s live traffic and platform metrics exploded. At the peak, concurrent live streams even surpassed Rumble, with eyes now set on Twitch’s market share. Prospectors in the Boom: Different Plays from Hit Projects This wave has produced cohorts of “prospectors,” each with distinct modes. Their success reveals the diversity of narratives and business models emerging under Pump.fun’s live vertical. 1) IRL Adventure/Challenge These projects excel at generating “hero moments.” Bagwork is emblematic. Its narrative revolves around boxing spirit, but its viral spread stems from bold, even outrageous IRL acts: livestreaming an arrest at Dodger Stadium, getting slapped for grabbing a hat at a gym, and more. These conflict-heavy clips, cut down for X and TikTok, broke out of crypto’s echo chamber and pulled in a flood of non-crypto viewers. The format fuses “reality-show” drama with Web3 token incentives, sending prices surging on viral momentum. 2) Charity/Tip-Interaction These projects tap human goodwill and emotional resonance. KIND donates 100% of creator rewards to small streamers, centering on public-interest and love. The narrative attracts like-minded users and builds robust community identity through “acts of good.” STREAMER looks more like a Web3 version of “short-video tipping”: it reroutes trading fees to tip popular streamers in exchange for promotion and uses live leaderboards so supporters feel participatory pride while backing their favorites. 3) Leveraging Web2 Star Power: BUN COIN Former League of Legends pro @BunnyFuFuu launched a token on Pump.fun riding his massive YouTube and X following, quickly drawing huge attention. Meanwhile, CLIP, focused on UGC, rewards users for creating and sharing short videos, combining the viral mechanics of short-form culture with crypto incentives to create a positive flywheel. All these wins show Pump.fun’s live-stream model has surpassed “just launching a coin.” It’s building a hybrid ecosystem of entertainment, social, incentives, and finance. The Model Logic: Pump.fun’s Closed Loop and FOMO Engine The “live-token” logic on Pump.fun essentially binds content consumption → community participation → token price into a loop: Viewers buy tokens to back the streamer → streamer generates IRL moments and topics → community amplifies virally → token price rises; creator and platform take fees → platform uses fees to buy back $PUMP → lifts ecosystem market cap. Notable traits: Immediacy: audience mood shows up instantly in the market. High risk/high reward: IRL content creates explosive highs — but can crater just as fast. Streamer dependence: token narrative and value are tightly tied to a streamer’s sustained output. …And the Risks That Come With It A path with “time sensitivity, high upside, and strong dependency” is risky in any vertical — Pump.fun is no exception: 1) Short Content Lifecycles; Fragile Core Narrative Most live tokens hinge on a streamer’s charisma and cadence. If they burn out or leave, consensus collapses fast. Hype depends on “highlight moments.” Without fresh stunts, viewers churn quickly. Prices can halve in a heartbeat, with lifespans often shorter than classic meme coins. 2) outsized Streamer Power; Human-Nature Risk Amplified Live, interactive formats make audiences easier to sway. In this high-volatility setup, streamer speech power is outsized, and any misstep can whip prices. Data shows these tokens can be +27% in a day, then dump 80% in a flash — making them speculative instruments, not steady investments. 3) Fragile Community Consensus With little long-term cultural ballast and mostly short-term emotion at work, constructive value is scarce. Stats suggest 99.8% of Pump.fun launches end up worthless — not by accident. 4) The Sword of Damocles: Compliance & Regulation IRL challenges often skirt legal gray zones. Despite Pump.fun’s improvements, live content and token issuance still face major regulatory risk. If deemed illegal fundraising or securities fraud, the platform and ecosystem could be shuttered. Yet — What’s Worth Watching Despite the risks, Pump.fun’s model does surface intriguing possibilities: 1. From “Solo Show” to “Shared Culture” Expect game-based live tokens where viewers vote on gameplay — diluting dependence on a single face and creating shared narratives. 2. VTuber/AI Fusion AI-assisted creation + VTuber avatars can stabilize output and reduce IRL risk. 3. Charity/Public-Good Tracks KIND proves “positive sentiment” can move price. More “benevolent narratives” may emerge. 4. Ecosystem Integration Pump.fun could extend deeper into entertainment/gaming, competing for slices of Twitch and YouTube. Conclusion Pump.fun’s live-stream surge is a bold innovation, deeply fusing Web2 entertainment with Web3 token economics. It proves crypto is not only a technical sandbox but also a cultural and entertainment testbed. For everyday participants, this wave demands extreme caution. Staying sober in the frenzy is the only survival guide. Beyond chasing near-term “highlight moments,” evaluate whether a project’s narrative is sustainable, its community culture is healthy, and the creator’s long-term plan is credible. Always remember: in crypto, 99.8% of projects go to zero. Don’t let short-term parabolic moves and FOMO cloud judgment — DYOR, and never go all-in.

#USDT #USAT #Tether Is USDT getting a sibling? On September 12, the world’s largest stablecoin issuer, Tether, officially announced it will launch USAT, a U.S.-market–focused, fully compliant U.S. dollar stablecoin. At the same time, Tether named former White House Crypto Council Executive Director Bo Hines as USAT’s CEO and confirmed the coin will go live before year-end, in compliance with the newly passed GENIUS Act in the United States. The news drew strong attention across the global crypto market and traditional finance. For years, Tether’s USDT has been viewed as an “offshore dollar,” with a market cap of $169 billion, accounting for 58% of the stablecoin market. Yet it has never fully entered the U.S. compliance framework. Now, the launch of USAT signals Tether is proactively filling that gap — moving into a new stage as an onshore dollar. So where are USAT’s core highlights? Why did Tether choose to roll out a compliant stablecoin now? What impact will this move have on the U.S. and global stablecoin markets? This article breaks it all down. Why Is Tether Launching USAT? From the outside, Tether hardly looks short on money. In 2024, Tether’s net profit hit $13 billion, and it even became one of the largest holders of U.S. Treasuries — surpassing countries like Germany, South Korea, and Australia. So why go to all the trouble to launch an entirely new, U.S.-compliant stablecoin? Mainly three reasons: 1. The massive potential of the U.S. market While USDT is hugely popular globally, it has long been suppressed in the U.S. by rival Circle’s USDC. Circle has leveraged compliance advantages and licenses to lock in U.S. enterprise and institutional users. As the world’s largest financial market, the U.S. is not somewhere Tether can remain absent forever. 2. Regulatory pressure forcing a shift The U.S. recently passed the GENIUS Act, explicitly requiring stablecoins to be backed 1:1 by cash or U.S. Treasuries and to undergo audits. USDT’s reserves include bitcoin, gold, and other assets — out of scope under the act. In other words, without a compliant product, Tether would be marginalized in the U.S. market. 3. A dual-track global strategy USDT will continue as the offshore dollar, serving emerging markets and the unbanked; USAT will be the onshore dollar, giving U.S. enterprises and financial institutions a compliant stablecoin option. This is Tether’s “dual-coin strategy.” In short: USDT solves global usability; USAT solves U.S. compliance. “Compliance” Is USAT’s Biggest Selling Point USAT’s number-one draw is, without doubt, compliance. But merely meeting regulatory requirements doesn’t fully capture its strategic importance. In reality, USAT signals stablecoins entering a “2.0” phase: not just payment tools, but bridges between TradFi and Web3. 1) Under U.S. oversight: Compliance is the ticket in — and a moat USAT’s issuer is Anchorage Digital — a national trust bank regulated by the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and the only national-level compliant institution approved to custody crypto assets. Historically, the biggest “short board” for stablecoin projects has been regulatory uncertainty — USAT directly addresses this pain point. This not only means USAT can legally operate in the U.S., but that it has a compliance moat. For traditional financial institutions, compliance is the prerequisite for adoption. Banks, payment giants, and multinationals rely far more on regulatory frameworks than retail users or DeFi participants. USAT’s backing gives it a shot at entering the mainstream financial system, potentially becoming a standardized tool for enterprise on-chain settlement. In other words, USAT’s “compliance” isn’t just a regulatory rubber-stamp — it’s the admission ticket to institutional adoption. That’s something USDT has long lacked. 2) Transparent reserves & compliant audits: A trust revolution for stablecoins Tether’s most persistent criticism has been reserve transparency. While USDT enjoys enormous liquidity worldwide, institutional investors and U.S. regulators have remained skeptical of its reserve composition. USAT will be different. It commits to 100% backing by cash and U.S. Treasuries, strictly maintaining a 1:1 reserve. More importantly, reserves will be custodied by Cantor Fitzgerald, a top Wall Street investment bank and primary dealer that deals directly with the Federal Reserve. What does this mean? Users can redeem 1:1 at any time without worrying about reserve shortfalls; Regular audits ensure transparency, boosting institutional confidence; Since Treasuries are among the safest assets, USAT’s credit risk is almost equivalent to the U.S. Treasury itself. This amounts to a stablecoin trust revolution. In recent years, frequent blow-ups (e.g., TerraUSD) eroded confidence in “algorithmic” support. USAT’s reserve model plugs those holes: not only compliant, but verifiable. 3) Strong personnel background: Dual protection — from product to policy In finance and crypto, personnel often matter more than products. Tether’s appointment of Bo Hines as USAT CEO is a strategically significant choice. Hines comes from the policy world, having served as Executive Director of the White House Crypto Council and deeply involved in U.S. digital asset policymaking. He not only understands how to engage with regulators, but can also push stablecoins onto the policy agenda. This means USAT is not just a product — it’s also a “political calling card”: It can play offense in regulatory negotiations; It can respond to new policy immediately, avoiding passive remediation; It can build direct channels with Congress, Treasury, and other agencies. Put differently, USAT’s localization is not just a registered address in the U.S. — it is a full entry into the policy discourse. That’s critical for winning institutional trust. 4) Platform tech upgrade: Not only a stablecoin, but an asset-tokenization tool USAT will run on Tether’s Hadron technology platform. Hadron is Tether’s next-gen infrastructure that supports not only stablecoin issuance but also real-world asset (RWA) tokenization. This means USAT’s future goes beyond “1 USD = 1 USAT.” It may connect with broader assets: Treasuries on-chain: let institutions buy/sell U.S. Treasuries directly on-chain, simplifying settlement; Corporate bonds or notes: via the USAT platform, companies could issue tokenized debt, lowering financing thresholds; Commodities & real estate: in the future, users could buy or collateralize gold, real estate, and more within the USAT ecosystem. From this perspective, USAT isn’t a standalone product; it is a key cornerstone for putting U.S. dollar assets on-chain. Its potential goes far beyond payments and transfers — it could become the general gateway for U.S. financial assets entering Web3. 5) In summary, USAT offers four core advantages: Compliance: Recognized by U.S. regulators — the entry ticket for institutions; Transparency: 100% cash & Treasuries backing — setting a new trust standard; Localization: Deep political/policy background — smoother regulatory interfacing; Technology: With the Hadron platform, a foundational layer for asset tokenization. If USDT is the global “offshore dollar,” USAT is the U.S.-domestic “onshore dollar.” The two complement each other, forming Tether’s dual-track strategy. This is not only Tether’s transformation — it also marks the stablecoin industry’s entry into a new era of compliance + institutionalization. Impact on the Industry Landscape 1. A direct threat to USDC Circle’s biggest advantage has been compliance. Now Tether is playing that card with USAT. With Tether’s scale and brand power, USAT could quickly attract a large user and institutional base. 2. A challenge to traditional financial institutions JPMorgan, Stripe, and even the Federal Reserve are exploring stablecoins. Tether’s move is a beachhead landing, putting pressure on banks and payment giants. 3. A template for global regulators Hong Kong launched the world’s first stablecoin regulatory ordinance in 2025, while the U.S. GENIUS Act represents another model. Tether’s dual-coin strategy will be a case study for regulators worldwide. Conclusion: Will USAT Become America’s “On-Chain Dollar”? Tether’s USAT is not just a product upgrade — it’s a strategic shift: From offshore to onshore; From opaque to compliant; From global hegemon to a powerful competitor in the U.S. market. The future stablecoin landscape may look like this: USDT: Continues to dominate globally, especially in emerging markets; USAT: Faces off against USDC in the U.S. market; Other stablecoins: Seek niches and specific application scenarios. One thing is certain: USAT’s birth will accelerate industry reshuffling and deepen the U.S. dollar’s footprint in digital finance

#CryptoAssets #Crypto #BTC Why hold crypto assets? You might think that, as a crypto professional, urging people to hold crypto is just business as usual. But I’m guessing you haven’t looked closely at data like this: The number of Fortune 100 companies announcing cryptocurrency, blockchain, or Web3 initiatives rose 39% year over year. A survey of Fortune 500 executives found 56% say their firms are building on-chain projects, including consumer-facing payment apps. About 34% of small and mid-sized businesses now use crypto — double the 2024 figure. 46% of non-users plan to start using crypto within the next three years. Roughly 80% of institutional investors plan to increase allocations to crypto assets in 2025. The top 20 economies worldwide are all deploying crypto infrastructure — stablecoins, RWA, and more. This tells us crypto and blockchain are being broadly adopted and invested in by enterprises and institutions globally. So is crypto still “niche” or “marginal”? After more than a decade of development, the industry is very much center stage. Now back to the core question: Why hold crypto assets? Their significance goes far beyond speculation. From multiple angles, here’s why holding crypto is a choice worth serious consideration in the digital era. “Digital Gold”: A New Form of Store of Value Many people first hear about crypto via Bitcoin being called “digital gold.” That’s not a throwaway metaphor. Gold’s value stems from scarcity, global consensus, and inflation resistance. Bitcoin shares these traits: Scarcity: Supply is capped at 21 million — no infinite debasement. Global consensus: Running for 15+ years with participants worldwide — trust is hard-won. Inflation hedge: As fiat currencies like the USD and EUR steadily lose purchasing power, Bitcoin’s store-of-value role stands out. In short, holding Bitcoin is like moving your wealth onto a global, tamper-resistant ledger. That “digital gold” profile makes it a useful tool for hedging fiat debasement. A Decentralized Financial Toolset If traditional finance is a skyline of high-rises, crypto is a new city being built. In this city, banks, brokers, and clearinghouses are replaced by code. Smart contracts move and transact value without third-party intermediaries. For example: In traditional finance, a cross-border transfer can take days and cost hefty fees. On-chain, with stablecoins like USDT/USDC, you can complete cross-border payments in minutes at near-zero cost. This efficiency and decentralization are reshaping what finance can be. Holding crypto means participating in this new system — and directly enjoying its convenience and freedom. A New Avenue for Wealth Growth Critics say crypto is too volatile. True — volatility exists. But that’s also where opportunity lives. A quick look back: 2010: 1 BTC < $1 2017: BTC broke $20,000 2021: BTC above $69,000 2025: BTC above $120,000 Such moves are almost unimaginable in traditional markets. Not every crypto asset will chart a curve like Bitcoin’s. But as a whole, this emerging market is still expanding rapidly. Like the internet in the 1990s, early risk and bubbles were inevitable — yet those who held through cycles and rode the trend captured outsized returns. A Borderless, Global Asset In the real world, finance is constrained by countries, banks, and capital controls. Crypto is inherently borderless: No bank account required — just a wallet to manage global assets. No convoluted FX process — transact with anyone in any country. Even where financial infrastructure is weak, crypto lets people plug into the global economy. That gives crypto a natural financial-inclusion profile. In developing regions, it’s not just an investment vehicle — it may be the only practical on-ramp to modern finance. Your Ticket to the Innovation Economy Crypto isn’t just a wealth container — it’s a ticket into tomorrow’s digital economy: DeFi: Provide liquidity, earn yield, borrow/lend — you need crypto assets to participate. NFTs: Collect digital art or virtual land — traded with crypto. GameFi, SocialFi, the metaverse: These ecosystems all run on crypto at the core. Holding crypto is effectively holding an access pass to frontier innovation. Without it, engaging with these new economies becomes much harder. A Hedge Against Uncertainty The 2020 pandemic, 2022 geopolitical shocks, 2023 global inflation — recent years underline how uncertain the world has become. In that context, relying solely on fiat or traditional assets can be riskier than it seems. Crypto — especially Bitcoin and stablecoins — is emerging as a hedging tool: Bitcoin: Hedge against long-term inflation and monetary expansion. Stablecoins: Park capital during volatility while staying on-chain and liquid. This flexible mix can make portfolios more resilient and help investors weather uncertainty. A Wealth Identity for the Young Crypto is also a cultural signal, especially for younger generations. For many born in the 1990s and 2000s, crypto isn’t just a way to profit — it’s a statement of values and freedom: Belief in an open, transparent, decentralized future. Building new social and economic relationships in virtual spaces. Treating crypto ownership as a badge of participation in what’s next. That’s why adoption among younger cohorts outpaces traditional assets. Policy and the March Toward Compliance Worried that governments might ban crypto outright? The global trend is not prohibition, but regulated integration: The U.S., EU, and Japan are bringing crypto under formal regulatory frameworks. Hong Kong and Singapore are actively embracing the industry and attracting firms. Stablecoins and ETFs are pushing crypto into mainstream finance. That means holding crypto is likely to become more compliant, less risky, and more widely accepted over time. How to Hold Crypto Rationally Every investment has risk — crypto included. To hold sensibly: Think long-term: Don’t be shaken by short swings; zoom out for the big picture. Diversify: Avoid all-in bets. Allocate across Bitcoin, Ethereum, stablecoins, and a measured slice of high-conviction projects. Security first: Use secure wallets, protect your keys, beware of strangers and too-good-to-be-true yields. Keep learning: Crypto evolves fast. Continuous learning helps you seize opportunities and sidestep traps. Conclusion: The Future Is Here — Your Move To recap: Bitcoin is digital gold — a tool against inflation. Crypto assets are the core of decentralized finance — offering efficiency and freedom. They’re a new channel for growth, a borderless global asset, a ticket to innovation, and a hedge. And increasingly, they’re the wealth identity of a new generation. So why hold crypto assets? Because they’re not just an investment — they’re your connection to the digital future. In the 20th century, you may have missed the internet’s windfall. In the 21th, are you ready to grasp the opportunity that crypto brings?

At the inaugural OECD Global Financial Markets Roundtable held recently in Paris, France, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chair Paul S. Atkins delivered a speech that drew worldwide attention. Unlike the SEC’s cautious — even adversarial — stance toward crypto in recent years, Atkins’ message this time was unmistakably clear. He stated bluntly: “The era of cryptocurrencies has arrived.” He further emphasized that most crypto tokens are not securities, and that the United States must provide entrepreneurs with clear rules for financing and trading — rather than letting them wander in a gray zone. At the same time, he introduced Project Crypto, a plan aimed at modernizing the securities regulatory framework end-to-end and, for the first time, placed artificial intelligence (AI) and blockchain together in a future vision of finance on the global stage. This speech isn’t just about a shift in regulatory tone; it could become a watershed moment for the next decade of U.S. capital markets. Below is a comprehensive breakdown from several angles. Four Angles to Interpret Paul S. Atkins’ Speech 1) A Redefinition of Crypto’s Status Over the past decade, the SEC’s approach to crypto has wavered. More often than not, it has leaned toward classifying tokens as securities and has frequently relied on enforcement actions to clamp down on crypto firms. Giants like Coinbase and Ripple have long been locked in regulatory tug-of-war due to the SEC’s hardline stance. In this speech, however, Atkins made one core point crystal clear: Most crypto tokens are not securities. The SEC will draw clear boundaries and provide explicit standards, rather than rely on “enforcement by ambiguity.” Entrepreneurs must be able to raise capital on-chain without living under perpetual legal uncertainty. What does this mean? Compliance pathways for fundraising open up: Until now, many U.S. blockchain startups had to set up overseas entities or design convoluted structures to skirt U.S. rules. Once lines are clearly drawn, they can finance directly in the U.S. Market confidence strengthens: Investors fear policy risk most. When the SEC Chair publicly says “not all tokens are securities,” it’s essentially a market-wide reassurance. A shift from “enforcement first” to “rules first”: For the entire industry, this marks a transition from fear to order. Put simply, this shift could directly propel the U.S. to become the new global center of crypto innovation. 2) Project Crypto: Blockchain-Enabling the Securities Rulebook Throughout the speech, Atkins repeatedly referenced Project Crypto — an ambitious SEC-led initiative whose goals are to: Modernize the securities regulatory framework comprehensively; Build on-chain capital markets; Allow trading, lending, staking, and related services to operate under one unified framework. In other words, financial services that used to be strictly siloed could be integrated into a more efficient, unified system. In the crypto world, this model is often dubbed a “super app.” Example: Today in the U.S., to buy stocks you go through a broker, to borrow you go to a bank or lender, and if you want staking or yield products, there are virtually no compliant channels. In the future envisioned by the SEC, you might do everything on one platform — and entirely on-chain. This isn’t just a regulatory upgrade — it’s a digital revolution in the financial system. 3) AI + Blockchain: Toward Agency Finance Another highlight: Atkins paired AI and blockchain in the same breath and introduced the concept of “Agency Finance.” His vision: AI will become the executor of automated finance — conducting trading, risk management, and capital allocation at speeds far beyond human capacity. Blockchain provides a transparent, auditable foundation for settlement and compliance. Together, the market could evolve toward self-running financial agents with minimal human intervention. It may sound sci-fi, but the trend is already visible: Major Wall Street banks are using AI for quantitative strategies. In DeFi, smart contracts already shoulder part of the “automated oversight” function. When these two truly merge, we may see entirely new financial paradigms. For example, an AI agent could automatically allocate your portfolio — stocks, tokens, bonds, even NFTs — while every action is recorded on-chain in real time, both compliant and transparent. For everyday investors, this means Wall Street-grade strategies could finally become democratized. 4) A Dialogue with Europe: MiCA and Cross-Border Cooperation Atkins also called out the EU’s MiCA framework — arguably the most complete crypto regulatory regime in force globally — and noted its ongoing rollout in Europe. He said: The U.S. needs to learn from Europe, especially the clarity MiCA provides. International cooperation is essential; blockchain is inherently global and cannot be policed by one country alone. Implications: In the future, the U.S. and Europe may push cross-border compliant frameworks in tandem. If the two largest financial blocs converge on crypto regulation, other regions will be compelled to follow. This would push global digital assets into a new era of compliant internationalization. Why Did This Speech Cause Such a Stir? A fundamental shift in regulatory posture: The era of “enforcement first” gives way to an era of clear, knowable rules. The U.S. may reclaim the crypto innovation hub: In the last two years, Dubai, Singapore, and Hong Kong lured many crypto firms with friendly policy. If the SEC offers stable rules, the U.S. could draw capital and companies back. A digital restructuring of capital markets: Trading, lending, staking, and more operating under one platform and one framework will massively raise efficiency and reshape competition. A new AI + blockchain paradigm: Once AI marries on-chain finance, the capital markets of tomorrow may look nothing like today’s. Acceleration of global compliance trends: If the U.S. and Europe reach consensus, the global regulatory map for digital assets will be rewritten. Where Are the Opportunities — for Investors and Businesses? For Investors More compliant products: In the future, within a compliant framework, you may directly buy tokenized Apple, Microsoft, or even AI-driven portfolio funds. Lower risk: Less fear of “stepping on landmines” due to unpredictable SEC enforcement. For Startups Clearer funding channels: The ability to raise capital legally within the U.S. More room to innovate: Super apps, AI-powered financial services, and more may be explicitly permitted to explore. For Traditional Financial Institutions Enormous transformation pressure: Those who don’t keep pace with blockchain and AI risks may be overtaken by new platforms. Conclusion As Atkins quoted Victor Hugo: “People can resist the invasion of an army, but not the invasion of an idea.” Crypto was once rejected, suppressed, and marginalized. Now it is becoming part of the global financial system. This time, the United States is not choosing resistance — but leadership. From Project Crypto, to AI-driven agency finance, to regulatory cooperation with Europe, the signal from this speech is unambiguous: the crypto era has truly arrived.

#SuperEx #DeFi What is DeFi? Its full name is Decentralized Finance. Why decentralize? The reason is simple. Most of us are used to bank accounts, stock investing, or credit card spending — all of which rely on centralized institutions for management and approval. The result, as everyone has likely experienced firsthand: frequent delays, cumbersome processes, and fees set unilaterally by the central institution. DeFi (Decentralized Finance) offers a brand-new financial model. Through blockchain and smart contracts, asset management, lending, trading, and even wealth management can all be completed without intermediaries. You no longer need to rely on banks, nor worry about human delays or complicated procedures. Funds operate automatically on-chain according to rules, and every step is transparent and auditable. DeFi is not just a new concept — it is gradually reshaping the global financial ecosystem. It allows users to control their funds autonomously while participating in multiple financial activities: you can lend assets to earn interest, provide liquidity to receive trading rewards, and use automated strategies to optimize returns. Compared with traditional finance, DeFi’s advantages lie in openness, transparency, and flexibility, but it also carries risks such as smart contract vulnerabilities, market volatility, and regulatory uncertainty. From the perspective of the SuperEx Popular Science Series, this article provides a comprehensive interpretation of DeFi. We will introduce DeFi’s core concepts, market hotspots, operating guidelines, as well as technology and trends — so that you both understand its logic and know how to participate in practice, enabling digital assets to work better. SuperEx Popular Science Series: Understanding DeFi's Logic and Opportunities from Scratch What is DeFi? Its full name is Decentralized Finance. Why decentralize?The reason is simple. Most of us are used to… news.superex.com DeFi Basics What is DeFi Imagine a world with no bank counters and no central institutions, yet you can still complete lending, trading, insurance, and even derivatives investing. That is DeFi. DeFi stands for Decentralized Finance, and its core idea is to use blockchain and smart contracts to replace intermediaries in traditional finance. In the traditional financial system, your funds must be processed by banks, brokerages, or payment institutions. Every step involves human intervention, along with fees, delays, and credit risk. In DeFi, smart contracts are “digital stewards.” Once rules are written on-chain, they cannot be tampered with; anyone can operate according to the code’s rules — truly decentralized. Core components of DeFi Smart Contract Smart contracts are the soul of DeFi. They are like auto-executing programs: once the trigger conditions are met, the contract terms execute automatically. For example, depositing assets on Aave or Compound will automatically calculate interest and distribute yield without human intervention. DEX Examples include Uniswap and SushiSwap. They have no centralized servers; all trades are matched automatically on-chain via liquidity pools. You don’t need to open an account, nor worry about an exchange collapse. Liquidity Pool Think of it as a giant digital pool. Users deposit tokens to be used for others’ trades. In return, you receive trading fees and liquidity-mining rewards. Lending Protocol Traditional lending requires credit checks. DeFi lending uses collateral instead. For example, you can borrow USDC by collateralizing ETH. The entire process requires no manual approval — everything is handled by on-chain contracts. Yield Aggregator Projects like Yearn.finance act like smart wealth managers. They automatically allocate funds among different DeFi protocols to help you maximize returns. DeFi Market Hotspot Analysis Current popular protocols Uniswap: a leader in the AMM model, with the highest trading volume among DEXs. E.g., SuperEx Free Market AMM Aave & Compound: core protocols in the lending market, with flexible, adjustable rates. Curve: a stablecoin trading platform with low slippage and high efficiency. Yearn.finance: a yield aggregator that automatically optimizes strategies to grow assets. Market data and trends As of 2025, total value locked (TVL) in DeFi exceeds US$150 billion. The Ethereum ecosystem remains dominant, while chains like Solana, Polygon, and Arbitrum are growing rapidly. Active user addresses exceed 12 million, with a steadily rising number of participants in lending, trading, and liquidity provision. Current trends include: 1）Cross-chain interoperability: enhancing asset liquidity across different chains. Specifically, this refers to enabling assets and information to flow freely among different public chains. In the early stages, users could only operate assets on a single chain, limiting capital flexibility and use cases. For example, if your funds are on Ethereum, you can’t directly participate in DeFi projects on Solana or Polygon, which reduces efficiency across the entire DeFi ecosystem. To break this limitation, cross-chain technology emerged. Bridges like Wormhole and LayerZero allow assets on different chains to circulate freely, enabling users to participate in lending, liquidity provision, or arbitrage on multiple chains. This not only improves capital utilization, but also accelerates DeFi’s expansion and interconnection. 2）Layer 2 scaling: reducing transaction costs and increasing speed. Scaling addresses congestion and high fees on main chains like Ethereum. At peak times, Ethereum’s transaction costs can reach tens of dollars — too high a barrier for small users. Layer 2 solutions such as Arbitrum and Optimism offload part of the transaction processing off-chain, then batch-write back to the main chain, dramatically lowering costs while increasing speed. This allows users to participate in DeFi operations more frequently — such as providing liquidity, conducting lending operations, or executing arbitrage — without high fees eating into returns. 3）Stablecoin innovation: providing a safer, low-volatility medium of exchange. This is also an important trend in DeFi’s development. Stablecoins are crypto assets pegged to fiat to reduce the impact of price volatility on user operations. Common stablecoins include USDT, USDC, and DAI. As DeFi scales, demand grows for safer, more transparent, and lower-volatility stablecoins. The new generation of stablecoins optimizes collateral and algorithmic mechanisms and enhances compliance and transparency — helping users manage assets more safely in DeFi trading and lending while reducing potential risks. Overall, these three trends reinforce each other to improve liquidity, efficiency, and security across the DeFi ecosystem — making DeFi attractive not only to high-net-worth investors but increasingly suitable for ordinary users, thereby pushing decentralized finance toward maturity. 4）Risks and regulation Smart contract vulnerabilities: may be exploited by hackers. Market volatility: highly volatile assets may trigger collateral liquidations. Regulatory uncertainty: policies are still evolving in many countries and may affect returns and operational freedom. DeFi Practical Guide For users who want to participate in DeFi, understanding operating steps and risk management is crucial. While DeFi brings more freedom and return opportunities, there is no traditional financial institution to backstop you. Security awareness and strategy selection directly determine your experience and the safety of your funds. Below are detailed notes on four aspects: wallet choice, security measures, capital allocation, and common strategies. Wallet choice and security A wallet is the entry point to DeFi. It not only stores your assets but also signs transactions and accesses DeFi protocols. Different wallets suit different needs: 1）MetaMask The most commonly used wallet for Ethereum and EVM chains, available as a browser extension and mobile app. With MetaMask, you can directly access DeFi protocols like Uniswap, Aave, and Compound. It’s simple and beginner-friendly. The downside is that you manage your private key and seed phrase yourself; leakage or loss can result in asset loss. 2）Trust Wallet Trust Wallet supports multi-chain assets and offers an excellent mobile experience — suitable for users who operate frequently on phones. It has a built-in DApp browser that connects to most DeFi protocols. As with any self-custody wallet, keep your seed phrase safe. 3）Super Wallet Super Wallet is a decentralized, multi-chain Hierarchical Deterministic wallet that provides security for using the Dapp Open System and for storing large crypto assets. At the same time, Super Wallet integrates perfectly with the SuperEx operational system, providing asset segregation for everyone — ensuring assets are 100% safe — while giving SuperEx the trading efficiency of a CEX and the storage security of a DEX. As the first platform to propose and integrate Web3 wallet and CEX exchange functions, SuperEx put forward the integration design on March 25, 2022, broke down the barrier between Web3 and the CEX app, and completed the in-app Web3 wallet product. 4）Security essentials Never disclose your private key or seed phrase. Whether via email, chat apps, or web forms, it can be phished or stolen. Avoid entering wallet information on insecure websites or unknown DApps. Always verify URLs and DApp sources. Check on-chain transaction records regularly. Even if your wallet is secure, monitor for anomalies and act promptly. By choosing the right wallet and maintaining strong security hygiene, users can greatly reduce operational risk and lay a solid foundation for DeFi practice. Capital allocation strategy High returns in DeFi come with high volatility, so capital management is key. For beginners entering the market, follow these principles: Start small: begin with small amounts to get familiar with wallet connections, borrowing and lending, and liquidity provision — understand operating costs and risks. Diversify: don’t put all funds into a single protocol or token. For example, split assets among lending platforms, liquidity pools, or yield aggregators. Diversification lowers risk and increases opportunity. Keep an emergency reserve: DeFi operations can be affected by big market swings, on-chain congestion, or protocol upgrades. Keeping a reserve helps you avoid forced liquidations or losses at bad prices. For example, if you have US$10,000 for DeFi: 30% into stablecoin lending to earn steady interest 30% into mainstream-asset liquidity pools to earn fees 20% via yield aggregators to optimize strategies 20% as an emergency reserve to operate during volatility or top up collateral This configuration maintains participation while reducing risk exposure. Common strategies and how to operate them 1）Liquidity mining One of the most common DeFi strategies. Users deposit tokens into liquidity pools for trading and receive fees plus platform-token rewards. For example, by providing ETH/USDC liquidity on Uniswap, you earn trading fees and may receive UNI rewards. Note the risk of impermanent loss: when the price swing between the pair is large, your position’s value may underperform simply holding the tokens. 2）Lending arbitrage This strategy earns from rate differentials. Borrow assets on a platform with lower rates, then lend them on a platform with higher rates to capture the spread. For example, borrow USDC on Aave and lend USDC on Compound. If executed properly, you can earn steady returns. Beware of liquidation risk: if collateral is insufficient or the market swings too much, the system will liquidate your collateral. 3）Yield aggregators Yield aggregators like Yearn.finance or Beefy automatically allocate user funds among different protocols to maximize returns. For example, Yearn can rotate deposited stablecoins among lending platforms to get the highest interest. This suits users who don’t want to operate frequently, but you still need to consider platform security and smart contract risk. 4）Risk reminders: Impermanent loss: providing liquidity may lead to returns below expectations when prices fluctuate — balance reward versus risk. Liquidation risk: maintain adequate collateral ratios in lending, or the system will liquidate your position. Smart contract risk: protocol bugs or hacks can cause asset loss. Operating costs: on-chain gas fees can rise at peak times and affect strategy returns — evaluate in advance. With the above strategies, users can participate flexibly in the DeFi market, but must tailor plans to their own risk tolerance and monitor positions at all times. DeFi Glossary TVL (Total Value Locked) The total value of assets locked in a DeFi protocol. TVL measures a protocol’s scale and liquidity. For example, Aave’s TVL is the total assets deposited or borrowed on Aave. APY (Annual Percentage Yield) The annualized return a user may obtain in a DeFi protocol. APY varies with rate fluctuations and reward-token distributions. For example, depositing USDC on Compound might yield 4%–6% APY. AMM (Automated Market Maker) A DEX model that matches trades automatically via smart contracts and liquidity pools — no order book needed. Uniswap and SushiSwap are typical AMMs. Liquidity Pool A pool where users deposit assets to facilitate trading, earning fees and reward tokens. For example, deposit equal-value assets in an ETH/USDC pool to participate in liquidity mining. Liquidity Mining Providing assets to liquidity pools in exchange for rewards — usually trading fees plus platform tokens. One of the main ways DeFi users earn additional yield. Collateralized Lending Borrowing funds by posting crypto as collateral. For example, collateralize ETH to borrow USDC. Insufficient collateral or large price swings can trigger liquidation. Impermanent Loss When you provide assets to a liquidity pool, price changes in the pair can make your position worth less than simply holding the tokens. As the market reverts or when you exit, losses may be partially or fully realized. Liquidation When a borrower’s collateral is insufficient or the borrow ratio is too high, the system automatically sells part of the collateral to repay debt. Liquidation is part of lending risk management. Stablecoin A crypto asset pegged to fiat, such as USDT, USDC, or DAI. Used to reduce volatility and facilitate trading, lending, and payments. Staking Locking tokens in a protocol to receive rewards or participate in network governance. For example, staking ETH in Ethereum 2.0 to receive block rewards. Governance Token A token representing governance rights in a protocol. Holders can vote on decisions such as rate adjustments, listing new assets, or reward distribution. AAVE and UNI are governance tokens. DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization) An organization form based on smart contracts, governed collectively by token holders. DAOs enable decentralized decision-making; users are participants and rule-makers. Yield Aggregator A tool that automatically allocates funds across protocols to obtain the highest yield. For example, Yearn.finance reallocates based on rate changes to maximize returns. Cross-Chain Bridge A tool or protocol that enables assets to flow between different blockchains. For instance, Wormhole can move USDC from Ethereum to the Solana ecosystem. Layer 2 An expansion solution that runs on top of a main chain (e.g., Ethereum) to increase speed and reduce fees. Common Layer 2s include Arbitrum and Optimism. Transaction Fee The fee paid to execute a transaction or smart contract on a blockchain. High gas during peak times can impact DeFi strategy returns. Mining In DeFi, usually refers to earning tokens by contributing assets, providing liquidity, or staking — different from consensus mining but similar in logic: contribute resources, earn rewards. Composable Strategy Combining operations across DeFi protocols to build more complex strategies. For example, combining borrowing and lending, liquidity provision, and yield aggregators for layered returns. Risk Ratio / Collateral Ratio An indicator measuring the ratio of collateral to borrowed assets. Falling below required thresholds may trigger liquidation; a high risk ratio indicates insufficient collateral or high volatility. AMM Constant Product Formula The formula used by AMMs like Uniswap (x*y = k) to maintain pricing and liquidity. Understanding it helps assess liquidity-provider returns and risk. Summary and Action Guide DeFi is a new financial model that enables autonomous operation of funds, transparent management, and flexible use. To participate in DeFi, keep the following in mind: Create a secure wallet and safeguard your seed phrase Start small and diversif Learn strategies such as liquidity mining, lending arbitrage, and yield aggregation Follow protocol updates, market data, and regulatory developments Through the SuperEx platform, you can conveniently access the DeFi ecosystem, let digital assets truly play their role, and achieve efficient management and growth.