无有物

Kaspa 不需要成为另一个以太坊！ 它真正值得关注的，是 AI Agent 经济的价值流动层。 很多人评价 Kaspa 时，常常会问几个问题： Kaspa 上有没有 DeFi？ Kaspa 能不能跑 Uniswap？ Kaspa 什么时候像 Solana 一样热闹？ Kaspa 没有 EVM，是不是就没有生态？ 这些问题并不是完全错，但它们背后有一个默认前提： 区块链生态就应该按照以太坊的方式发展。我现在越来越觉得，这个前提本身需要重新思考。Kaspa 最值得讨论的地方，可能不是它能不能复制以太坊，而是它是否代表了另一种完全不同的区块链使用场景。 以太坊更像一个全球应用服务器。 它适合复杂合约、复杂金融、复杂状态管理。 Kaspa 更像一个高速价值流动网络。 它适合大量独立主体之间快速、低成本、可验证地交换价值。 这不是谁取代谁的问题。这是两个范式面对不同问题。EVM 和 UTXO，不是先进与落后的关系。很多人把 UTXO 理解成“老旧模式”，因为 Bitcoin 用的是 UTXO。但这可能是加密行业过去十年的一个认知偏差。 EVM 的核心，是全局状态。账户余额、合约状态、流动性池、借贷仓位，都在一个持续变化的全局状态里。这非常适合做复杂应用。 但它的代价是：所有人都在改同一本大账本。 而 UTXO 的逻辑不同。 它不是持续修改一个全局状态，而是像一张张独立支票：旧支票被花掉，新支票被生成。这种结构天然更适合并行处理、支付清算、小额结算和可验证历史。所以，EVM 和 UTXO 不应该被简单理解成： 新的 vs 老的；高级的 vs 原始的；有生态的 vs 没生态的。 更准确的理解是：EVM 是复杂应用平台。UTXO 是价值流动底座。 Kaspa 的意义，正是在于它试图把 UTXO 的价值流动优势，带到一个更高速、更低成本、更适合大规模交互的环境里。 为什么这和 AI Agent 有关？因为 AI Agent 经济的本质，不是“多一个聊天机器人”。真正的 Agent 经济，是大量智能体之间自动协作、自动调用服务、自动支付、自动建立信誉。未来可能出现这样的场景： 一个 Agent 帮你找数据； 另一个 Agent 帮你分析； 第三个 Agent 帮你验证结果； 第四个 Agent 帮你联系服务； 第五个 Agent 负责完成支付和记录。 它们之间会发生大量小额、高频、自动化交易。 一次数据调用，可能只值 0.001 美元。 一次验证服务，可能只值 0.005 美元。 一次模型推理，可能只值 0.01 美元。 一次转发、撮合、证明、提醒，也可能都有微小价值。 如果每一次交互都需要高额手续费、复杂授权、中心平台撮合，这个经济系统根本跑不起来。所以 AI Agent 经济真正需要的，不只是智能模型。它还需要一个底层网络，能够支持： 低成本支付； 高频结算； 链上身份； 可验证历史； 跨主体协作； 自动化服务调用； 不依赖中心平台的信誉积累。 这正是 Kaspa 值得被重新理解的地方！

为什么我长期持有，如特斯拉，股价没涨，但我还是挣了？ 下面告诉你方法： 长期看好一只美股，就用 卖Put→接货→卖Covered Call→被行权→再卖Put 循环，一边低成本持股，一边每月“收租”。下面直接给可执行模板。 一、没持仓时：用 Cash-Secured Put 低价建仓（边等边收钱） 适合：长期看好、现在略贵，想跌下来再买。 操作（以 AAPL 为例，现价 $190） 1. 卖 1 张虚值 Put：行权价 $170（比现价低10–15%），30天到期，收权利金 $3/股（共 $300）。 2. 账户留足现金：$170×100=$17,000（现金担保，避免裸卖风险）。 三种结果 • ✅ 股价 ≥$170：期权作废，白拿 $300，下月继续卖Put。 • ✅ 股价 <$170：被行权，$170 买入100股，实际成本 = $170−$3 = $167（比现价便宜）。 • ⚠️ 大跌：仍要按$170接货，但因为长期看好，等于“越跌越买、成本更低”。 参数模板（通用） • 行权价：现价−10~20%（安全边际）。 • 到期：30~45天（时间衰减快、回笼快）。 • 权利金：目标2~4%/月（年化20–40%，随波动率）。 二、已持仓后：滚动 Covered Call 持股收租（不涨就收钱，涨了也乐意卖） 适合：已持有100股以上、长期不卖、愿意放弃短期暴涨换稳定现金流。 操作（持有100股 AAPL，成本 $167，现价 $190） 1. 卖 1 张虚值Call：行权价 $210（比现价高10%），30天到期，收权利金 $4/股（共 $400）。 2. 一手对应100股，有多少股卖多少张（100股=1张，200股=2张）。 三种结果 • ✅ 股价 ≤$210：期权作废，白拿 $400，下月继续卖Call（持股不动）。 • ✅ 股价 >$210：被行权，$210 卖出100股，净赚 = ($210−$167)+$4 = $47/股；之后回到第一步，重新卖Put再接回。 • ⚠️ 大涨（如$250）：错过超额收益，但长期来看，每月权利金+偶尔行权止盈，长期收益通常强于纯持有。 参数模板（通用） • 行权价：现价+5~15%（尽量不被行权，又能多收租）。 • 到期：30天（时间衰减最快，适合月循环）。 • 权利金：目标2~3%/月（年化20–30%，高波动时更高）。 三、完整循环：Put→持股→Call→行权→再Put（长期持有+持续现金流） 1. 阶段1（空仓）：卖虚值Put → 收权利金 → 没跌就重复；跌了就低价接货。 2. 阶段2（持仓）：卖虚值Covered Call → 收权利金 → 没涨就长期持有、月月收租；涨了就高价卖出。 3. 阶段3（卖出后）：回到阶段1，重新卖Put，等待低价再接回，循环往复。 核心逻辑 • 长期看好 = 不怕跌、愿意长期拿。 • 卖Put = 降价买+先收钱。 • 卖Call = 不涨收钱、涨了止盈。 • 循环 = 永远在“低价买、高价卖、中间收租”，但始终围绕你看好的那只股。 四、风控与纪律（长期活下去的关键） 1. 只做你敢拿10年的股：如 AAPL、MSFT、NVDA 等，不碰概念股。 2. 永远现金担保卖Put：绝不裸卖，防止大跌爆仓。 3. 仓位不重：单股期权占用资金 ≤20%，不梭哈。 4. 行权价纪律：Put 虚值10–20%，Call 虚值5–15%，不贪深虚、不做平值。 5. 接受卖飞：长期来看，权利金+多次循环收益 > 单次暴涨，心态要稳。 方法： 用卖Put“打折买”，用Covered Call“持股收租+高价卖”，被行权后再卖Put接回，围绕好公司无限循环——长期持有、持续现金流、成本越做低。

看完才发现，我一直看的竟然是“阉割版”光模块视频… 这个讲光模块的视频确实不错，但我一直没想明白一个事。 为什么很多人搬运视频，总喜欢把原作者内容越搬越短? 原作者是视频号 #坤元财研 一共28分钟。 后来看到另一个号搬运，直接砍成25分钟。 结果但斌再搬一次，又砍成14分钟。 然后在X上疯狂传播的，就是 #但斌 这个版本， 总感觉前面刚讲明白，后面突然就跳了。 像看电影一样，中间莫名其妙少了几段。 后来一看，好家伙。 原来被连续动了两次刀。😂 有时候最有价值的东西，偏偏就在那些被剪掉的地方，这些东西，可以帮助你理解。 推荐大家直接看这个 #坤元财研 28分钟原版。 别最后吃了半天，发现上的还是删减版套餐。🤣 #CPO #光模块 #DSP #LPO #DML #EML #CW

孙宇晨的预判一向精准，十年前押英伟达、比特币，去年布局存储，今年又开始重仓物理AI，并直言是未来三年唯一主线。我们就全面拆解物理ai里七大核心细分赛道，聚焦低空经济、人形机器人、算力配套等高景气领域，全面拆解上下游产业链。

长鑫存储的材料与耗材供应链全景 昨天讲了长鑫的设备供应链，今天讲另一半的材料和耗材。这一块的国产化进度比设备端要快一截，但内部分化也更剧烈。长鑫2024年LPDDR系列占主营收入82.74%，材料消耗结构跟Mobile和AI需求节奏强相关。招股书披露2024年六大类原材料采购合计约114.7亿元（主要原材料采购金额121.9亿元），2025年上半年61.45亿元。六大品类结构是化学品37.29%、备件及其他约34.69%、光阻剂12.16%、硅片8.55%、气体5.10%、靶材2.21%。化学品从2022年的27.49%一路升到37.29%，已经超过备件成为第一大头，既来自DDR5迭代后湿法和ALD消耗量放大，也来自产能建设期备件采购前置完成后的镜像效应。按2026年Q1的业绩以及历史数据推测，全年材料采购规模冲到270亿以上是大概率。 一个品类一个品类看。 化学品占了近38%，是国产替代弹性最大的一格。湿电子化学品方面，晶瑞电材向长鑫供应高纯双氧水、硫酸、氨水、异丙醇、盐酸、硝酸、NMP等全品类，年出货量数千吨，核心产品已全面实现国产替代（晶瑞同时也是国内i线光刻胶龙头，见光阻剂段）。格林达是国内半导体显影液隐形冠军，国内唯一实现SEMI G5级TMAH显影液量产，已供应长鑫。江化微是国内湿电子化学品龙头，江阴本部产能9万吨/年，三大基地全部建成后总产能将超30万吨。CMP抛光液方面安集科技是绝对龙头，2024年抛光液营收15.5亿元，国内市占率约70%、全球约10-11%。CMP抛光垫方面鼎龙股份国内市占率超70%，在长江存储供应链中占主导地位，与长存共建联合实验室开展抛光垫底层技术攻关，CMP抛光垫2025年收入10.91亿元同比增长52.34%。ALD/CVD前驱体方面，雅克科技是国产龙头，已进合肥长鑫和长江存储。据产业链消息，安德科铭也值得关注，长鑫科技全资持股的长鑫芯聚2025年10月入股了这家公司，同时它本身就是长鑫的重要材料供应商，2024年自研High-K前驱体批量供货，2025年铜陵基地营收2.39亿元，形成210吨/年高纯前驱体产能，7款产品转量产。产业资本反向绑定材料厂的玩法在前道材料里很罕见，意味着高k前驱体已经被长鑫定性为战略环节亲自拉国产替代。化学品单价指数从2022年的100跌到2025上半年的77.90，过去三年累计跌22%。景气回升直接传导的是采购量而非单价，单价反弹要看上游化工大宗品走势，但量价叠加后化学品这一格的总采购额弹性最大。 备件及其他占近35%，是设备零部件耗材，包括反应腔体、石英件、密封圈、靶材辅件、传输部件等。单价跟着半导体大宗品价格剧烈波动，2024年单价指数升到156.53涨了56%，2025上半年骤降到97.29已经低于2022年水平。国产标的集中在石英件和密封件，菲利华是石英玻璃龙头，半导体级石英玻璃已用于多家头部晶圆厂。新莱应材在密封件和洁净管路国产替代上走得比较深。备件供应商集中度最高，2024年前五大供应商里有三家是备件供应商，合计占比超过19%。 光阻剂占12.16%，是材料端分层最严重的一格。i线光刻胶用于非关键层，晶瑞电材多年国内市占率第一，已批量供货长鑫，国产化率约10%。KrF已经跑通，晶瑞电材批量供合肥长鑫和中芯国际，彤程新材旗下科华微电子是国内唯一为本土8寸和12寸晶圆厂批量供应KrF的企业，上海新阳的KrF也实现批量销售。ArF还在爬坡，南大光电现有ArF光刻胶产能50吨/年，28纳米ArF已小批量供货（2025年销售额突破2千万元），14纳米浸没式良率达99.7%。市场流传的宁波500吨/年扩产项目公司称未实施，需谨慎对待。彤程新材的ArF/ArFi已开始批量供货。鼎龙股份的浸没式ArF获得了客户订单。上海新阳的ArF浸没式光刻胶也已取得销售订单。ArF国产化率从接近零开始破冰，已有少量供货，但离摆脱日本依赖还远。2025年日本对华光刻胶供应配额削减10-15%，年底部分日企暂停供货，倒逼效应明显。光刻胶的天花板跟光刻机一样硬，没有先进光刻机进入国内，先进光刻胶就没有真实的量产验证机会。国产ArF再好，也只能在长鑫这种被限制在DUV阶段的产线上跑。EUV光刻胶目前为零，上海新阳在开发但离量产很远。 硅片占比8.55%，是六大类里2025年下半年加仓最明显的一项。2025上半年占比一度跌到6.27%，全年回升到8.55%，反映下半年长鑫主动加大硅片备货，对应DRAM价格快速上涨之后产能爬坡和战略备库存的双重逻辑。国内主供是沪硅产业，2025年300mm硅片销量641.63万片，存储是其主要应用领域之一。立昂微12英寸硅片覆盖14纳米以上节点存储电路，进入部分存储客户供应链。海外端长鑫还在依赖信越、SUMCO、环球晶圆、Siltronic。对比长江存储已经大幅减少SUMCO采购转向国产，长鑫硅片国产化方向是定的，但完整切换还需要两到三年。 气体这一格要单独看。招股书披露的"气体"采购占5.10%，但有明确注释"气体不含大宗气体耗用"。也就是说5.10%只是工艺特气和电子特气，氮氢氧氩等大宗气体走的是另一条单独的供应通道。这条通道的国产化反而走得最彻底。广钢气体是长鑫最大的电子大宗气体供应商，双方签了15年长期供气协议，覆盖合肥和北京两座基地，2025上半年广钢在长鑫的采购占比40%到45%。15年长协在半导体材料端非常罕见，本身就是国产化已经走通的强信号。工艺特气这边，华特气体的光刻气国内市占率60%，全球四家通过ASML和Gigaphoton双重认证的企业之一。中船特气是国内电子特气第一、全球第九，2002年就突破了三氟化氮的国外垄断。金宏气体补充中端品类。气体单价指数从100跌到62.29，跌幅38%。单价跟上游工业气体成本走，但采购量跟着长鑫投片量走，量的弹性确定性最高。 靶材只占2.21%，但国产替代故事最完整。江丰电子覆盖铝、钛、钽、铜、钨全系列，钽/钛/铝靶已实现5纳米节点量产，部分产品进入3纳米工艺验证。有研新材旗下有研亿金是央企背景的第二供应商，稀土靶材全球市占超85%。这个环节国产化率已经在60%以上，对长鑫扩产的弹性主要体现在订单放量而不是国产突破。 掩模版是跟ArF光刻胶并列的另一个薄弱点。先进节点一套掩模版成本数百万美元，长鑫用的高端掩模版大概率仍由美国Photronics和日本Toppan、DNP供应，国产化率极低。 封测基本实现国产化。深科技旗下沛顿科技是长鑫最大的委外封测供应商，承接其超50%的封测需求，处理17纳米及以下先进制程。长电科技提供DRAM模组封装，通富微电配合开发HBM芯片样品。盛合晶微、华天科技也有布局。 HBM封装材料是新增量。招股书披露的原材料结构主要对应前道晶圆制造，HBM后段封装材料是2026到2027年才放量的新故事，对应长鑫上海HBM后段封装厂2026年底投产。华海诚科的颗粒状环氧塑封料（GMC）已通过客户验证处于送样阶段，芯片级底填胶已完成验证正在量产准备。联瑞新材配套供应HBM封装用GMC所需的球硅和Low α球铝。弹性最大但兑现要等长鑫上海后段厂投产。 招股书提及4F²等新型工艺架构是未来方向，业内公认对应VCAT垂直沟道访问晶体管路径。这意味着2027年以后的G6、G7工艺会带来新的材料需求，垂直沟道和堆叠结构对ALD前驱体、高深宽比刻蚀气体的依赖会进一步加深，雅克科技、安德科铭、华特气体这类公司的长期成长性会被进一步打开。 整体看材料端国产化进度领先设备端一个身位，但各品类差异很大。电子大宗气体（广钢主导超50%）、CMP抛光垫（鼎龙国内超70%）、靶材（江丰国内12寸超70%）已在50%以上。湿电子化学品和工艺特气在30-50%区间。前驱体尤其高k仍在20-30%。光刻胶和掩模版的国产化跟着光刻机天花板走，要等上游设备突破。HBM封装材料是2026到2027年才开始放量的新增量。基本面上可以满足量产需求，但顶层精细化学品和光刻胶仍依赖进口。 设备一次性资本开支属性强，材料是经常性采购。长鑫Q1单季营收508亿，2026年H1指引1100到1200亿，材料采购盘子冲到2026年270亿以上是大概率。这部分订单不需要等扩产完成，每多开一片晶圆就立刻转化成材料厂的收入。对广钢气体、安集科技、鼎龙股份、雅克科技、华特气体、江丰电子、格林达、晶瑞电材、沪硅产业这一批公司，长鑫扩产的传导比设备厂商更快，也更持续。

toccata live on testnet 10

why I’m personally excited about Kaspa’s upcoming Toccata covenants - for the first time, I can build creative, complex apps directly over infrastructure I helped design and build - we designed under architectural constraints, but the result came out surprisingly expressive and powerful - Silverscript is cool as hell - I can literally open a *.sil file and write a complex contract that will be fully verified on Kaspa L1 - (nottoself: create a 10-minute video showing the building of such an app e2e) - I can design my own vaults and safeguards, and manage funds securely without risking a heart attack each time I touch a wallet - covenant ids, contract templates, and inter-covenant communication (ICC) feel like a new set of axioms, or a new algebra to work with and discover - sig verify from stack / sighash anyone-can-pay + covenant ids can allow interesting shared-state covenants (requires a non-consensus miner policy; kudos to @maxibitcat for pushing this line of thinking) - complex contract systems can be deployed in one spk hash. no storage rent, no deployment tax; users pay only the transient mass for tx data as they use it - as I’ve mentioned in the past, this becomes especially interesting for AI/agentic environments, where bots could cheaply create one-time agreements between themselves - I didn’t even mention based apps yet. That’s a whole vertical that isn’t ready for exploration yet, but will be very soon

看完这个视频，我似乎终于知道： 为什么巴菲特手里囤着4000亿现金了！ ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️五星推荐，好内容！ 做投资的必看！看完视野就更清晰了！

Crazy stuff this mainnet crescendo @ hashdag’s

Sunday Vibes 🚕💨 Kaspa just hit another real-world milestone: the first $KAS-accepting taxi driver in Peru (and likely the world) is now officially on the road. Meet David @david_kas_peru — now proudly listed on kasmap.org — making $KAS real payments possible! Courtesy of Kaptain Kaspa 🫶🤝 This is exactly what adoption looks like — one practical use case at a time. If you're bullish on real-world Kaspa usage, join the $KPTKAS mission! Let’s bring #Kaspa adoption together! #KAS #RealWorldAdoption #KaptainKaspa x.com/i/status/20482…

The time has come for me to share what I’ve been working on ... Introducing #HASH. A grassroots, guerrilla marketing engine for #Kaspa, built with one goal: break out of the echo chamber and push Kaspa into the real world where it can’t be ignored. I've spent a lot of time the past couple years doing my part to spread the message, build awareness, and be a voice in the $Kas community. But there is still a gap between what Kaspa is and what the world sees. And I'm tired of sitting on the internet sidelines. That ends here. I want to take Kaspa to the streets. Over the coming weeks I’ll break down everything: what HASH is, how it works, how I plan to fund it, and how you can get involved. Stay tuned.

Okay, it's time for a little update: I just finished the work on the zero knowledge part of the vprogs framework, which introduces the ability to prove arbitrary computation. It consists of the following 8 PRs that gradually introduce the necessary features: 1. ZK-framework preparations (github.com/kaspanet/vprog…): This PR cleans up the scheduler and storage layers, extends the build tooling with workspace-wide dependency checking, adds the ability to publish artifacts for transactions and batches (which will later hold the proofs), renames some core types for clarity, and introduces lifecycle events on the Processor trait that allow a VM to hook into key scheduler events like batch creation, commit, shutdown, and rollback. 2. Core Codec (github.com/kaspanet/vprog…): This PR introduces a lightweight encoding library for ZK wire formats. In a zkVM guest, every byte operation contributes to the proof cost, so the codec is designed to reinterpret data in-place rather than copying it. It includes zero-copy binary decoding (Reader, Bits) and sorted-unique encoding for deterministic key ordering. It is built for no_std so it runs inside zkVM guests. 3. Core SMT (github.com/kaspanet/vprog…): To prove state transitions, we need cryptographic state commitments. This PR adds a versioned Sparse Merkle Tree that produces a single root hash representing the entire state. It includes all state-of-the-art optimizations: shortcut leaves at higher tree levels to avoid full-depth paths for sparse regions, multi-proof compression that shares sibling hashes across multiple keys, and compact topology bit-packing to minimize proof size. It integrates into the existing storage and scheduler layers so that every batch commit updates the authenticated state root, while rollback and pruning maintain tree consistency. 4. ZK ABI (github.com/kaspanet/vprog…): Defines the wire format for communication between the host and zkVM guest programs, establishing a universal language for proof composition. It specifies how inputs, outputs, and journals are structured for two levels of proving: the transaction processor, which proves individual transaction execution against a set of resources, and the batch processor, which aggregates transaction proofs and proves the resulting state root transition. Because the ABI is backend-agnostic and no_std compatible, any zkVM backend can directly use it (non-Rust zkVMs would need to reimplement the ABI in their language). 5. ZK Transaction Prover (github.com/kaspanet/vprog…): Introduces the transaction proving worker, which receives serialized execution contexts via the ABI wire format and submits them to a backend-specific prover on a dedicated thread. The Backend trait abstracts the actual proof generation, so different zkVM backends can be swapped without changing the pipeline. 6. ZK Batch Prover (github.com/kaspanet/vprog…): Introduces the batch proving worker, which collects the individual transaction proof artifacts, pairs them with an SMT proof covering the batch's resources, and submits the combined input to a backend-specific batch prover. The result is a single proof attesting to the entire batch's state root transition. Like the transaction prover, the Backend trait abstracts proof generation so different zkVM backends can be swapped without changing the pipeline. 7. ZK VM (github.com/kaspanet/vprog…): Wires everything together by implementing the scheduler's Processor trait with ZK proving support. The VM hooks into the lifecycle events introduced in PR 1 to feed executed transactions into the transaction prover and batches into the batch prover. Proving is optional and configurable - it can be disabled entirely, run at the transaction level only, or run the full batch proving pipeline. 8. ZK Backend RISC0 (github.com/kaspanet/vprog…): Provides the first concrete zkVM backend using risc0. It implements the transaction and batch Backend traits, includes two pre-compiled guest programs (one for transaction processing, one for batch aggregation), and ships with an integration test suite that verifies the full pipeline end-to-end - from transaction execution through batch proof generation to state root verification. TL;DR: While the early version of the framework focused on maximizing the parallelizability of execution, this feature focuses on extending this capability to maximizing the parallelizability of proof production. If you're a builder: this is the first version of the framework that lets you write guest programs with a Solana-like API (resources, instructions, program contexts) and have them proven in a zkVM. The current milestone uses a single hardcoded guest program - composability across multiple programs and bridging assets in and out of the L1 are part of the upcoming milestones, but if you're eager to start tinkering, the execution and proving pipeline is fully functional and provides a minimal environment to build and test guest logic today. Once we add user-deployed guests, they will move one logical layer down: the current transaction processor will become a hardcoded-circuit that handles invocation and access delegation to user programs, similar to how SUI handles programmable transactions (including linear type safety at the program boundary). In practice, this means guest programs will be invoked with a very similar API but scoped to a subset of resources, so the basic programming model won't change. Note that guests currently handle their own access authentication (e.g. signature checks) - the framework will eventually manage this automatically. If you want to contribute, two areas where community involvement would be especially impactful: - An Anchor-like DSL for writing guest programs -- the ABI is stable enough to build on, and a good developer experience layer would make this accessible to a much wider audience. - A second zkVM backend (e.g. SP1) - the Backend traits are designed for this, and a second implementation would prove out the abstraction. One thing I find particularly interesting in the context of PoW: the block hash provides an unpredictable, unbiasable random input that is revealed after transaction sequencing. This gives guest programs native access to on-chain randomness without oracles or additional infrastructure - something traditionally hard to achieve in smart contract platforms. PS: I am also planning to start with the promised regular hangouts but since I will visit my family over easter and want to get a better understanding of the open questions next week (it's good to have some problems to wrestle during that slower time 😅), I decided to start with that once I am back (12th of April). Generally speaking, is there a day that people would prefer for these hangouts? I guess monday would be bad as there is already another community event (write your preferences in the comments if you have a strong opinion).

WarpCore on Kaspa TESTING UPDATE: The only and most comprehensive full stack banking / financial rails on an L1 PoW. We have completed the following tests: 286 transaction type tests to run using various scenarios: 1. ✅ CBDC Full Issuance Workflow Token registration → minting → reserve attestation → Islamic instruments 2. ✅ Multilateral Netting Cycle Multi-participant obligations → gross/net calculations → settlement 3. ✅ Credit Facility Lifecycle Draw → repay → exceed limits → full lifecycle management 4. ✅ Nostro/Vostro Account Operations Multi-currency positions → payments → funding → position reporting 5. ✅ Liquidity Pool Participation Contributions → withdrawals → returns → multi-participant pooling 6. ✅ FX Forward Trading Quote → forward rates → netting → PvP settlement → T+2 7. ✅ Multi-Currency Netting Parallel netting across EUR, USD, GBP currencies 8. ✅ Islamic Finance Instruments Murabaha (cost-plus) → Ijara (lease) → Musharaka (profit-share) → Sukuk (bonds) 9. ✅ Herstatt Risk Exposure Settlement risk monitoring → high/medium/low categorization 10. ✅ Concurrent Transactions Parallel settlement operations → fund conservation 11. ✅ T+2 Settlement Workflow Trade date → T+1 confirmation → T+2 execution 12. ✅ Batch Payment Processing 100-item batch → success rate tracking 13. ✅ Treasury Operations Multi-currency positions → USD equivalency → revaluation 14. ✅ Settlement Failure Recovery Failure → retry logic → recovery verification 15. ✅ End-to-End Cross-Layer Settlement CBDC mint → liquidity allocation → FX trading → netting → nostro settlement Transaction Scenarios Covered Payment Operations ✅ Single payments ✅ Batch payments (100+ items) ✅ Multi-currency payments ✅ Concurrent transactions ✅ Failed payments with recovery Netting Operations ✅ Bilateral netting ✅ Multilateral netting (3+ parties) ✅ Multi-currency netting ✅ Gross/net calculations ✅ Netting settlement Credit Operations ✅ Credit draw ✅ Credit repayment (partial, full) ✅ Exceeded limits ✅ Credit facility lifecycle ✅ Facility expiry FX Operations ✅ FX quotes (bid/ask spreads) ✅ Forward rates ✅ NDF fixing ✅ PvP settlement ✅ Settlement risk (Herstatt) ✅ T+2 workflows ✅ Multi-currency trading Liquidity Operations ✅ Pool contributions ✅ Pool withdrawals ✅ Share calculations ✅ Return distribution ✅ Multi-participant pooling CBDC Operations ✅ Token issuance ✅ Supply minting ✅ Supply burning ✅ Reserve attestation ✅ Murabaha financing ✅ Ijara leasing ✅ Musharaka partnerships ✅ Sukuk instruments Account Operations ✅ Nostro account management ✅ Vostro account tracking ✅ Multi-currency positions ✅ Balance updates ✅ Position reporting Risk Operations ✅ Herstatt settlement risk ✅ Risk categorization ✅ Exposure monitoring ✅ Risk recovery Cross-Layer Operations ✅ CBDC → Liquidity flow ✅ Liquidity → FX flow ✅ FX → Settlement flow ✅ End-to-end workflows All 286 tests executed sequentially Zero test failures 100% pass rate #kaspa #warpcore #xrp #kii #poweredbyKaspa

发现个宝藏网站 Stock Circle，免费看投资大佬的持仓。 巴菲特 2630 亿美元的组合，165只股票，苹果占 22%，一笔一笔买卖记录都有。达里奥、木头姐的持仓也能查，连交易时间、估算成本价都给你标出来。 这些都是 SEC 强制披露的 13F 文件，Stock Circle 把它整理得清清楚楚。你能看到谁在加仓，谁在减持，哪些股票被多个大佬同时看中。 不是让你无脑跟单，而是学习他们的选股逻辑。为什么巴菲特重仓金融和消费？为什么木头姐押注科技成长股？看多了，你对不同投资风格就有感觉了。 网站界面简洁，数据翔实，比自己去 SEC 官网翻文件省太多时间。 stockcircle.com

老夏总是一针见血，这个确实是最简单投资美股的方式了！ 但是考虑到很多的朋友可能还不懂细节如何操作，我做了一个详细的细节操作： 1️⃣、打开微信检索 12367 直接线下预约办证，你就可以得到你的最近的办证地址，直接预约，到地址办证！ 2️⃣、一定要整三个苹果 ID，国区/港区/美区 ID，方便下载不同的 App，不懂如何操作？ 教程如下，不然就不是世界公民了x.com/WiseInvest513/… 2️⃣、有条件的直飞香港，没条件的先飞珠海/深圳，再入广澳门/香港！ 我过去推荐行程是先澳门再香港，如果不想动脑筋直接抄作业： 行程安排：x.com/WiseInvest513/… 实体卡安排：x.com/WiseInvest513/… 虚拟卡安排：x.com/WiseInvest513/… 不行看文字，那就看视频： 实体：youtube.com/watch?v=8zzn-I… 虚拟：youtube.com/watch?v=wqMChW… 3️⃣、不只有众安银行，还有蚂蚁澳门一样可以直接购买港美股，去澳门开业顺手开一个澳门蚂蚁：x.com/WiseInvest513/… 4️⃣、澳门蚂蚁和众安可以直接购买美股，即其即是一个银行，又是一个券商，一站式操作 5️⃣、入金可以通过币安入金，如果国内银行卡入金嫌弃手续费贵的，一定要去办理一个兴业银行寰宇人生借记卡，可以减免很多额外的手续费，汇款友好，教程如下：youtube.com/watch?v=2LcPWw… 6️⃣、如果不想要在众安里面购买，可以去各个券商里面开户，香港券商盈立/致富、美国券商嘉信/第一，这些都有教程，详细看此教程：x.com/WiseInvest513/… 7️⃣、直接众安购买也是最简单的方式，直接一步到位开始投资美股，做世界公民。 8️⃣至于钱如何回来，多种方式这里后续再展开细聊。 那你也可以直接绑定微信进行消费和支付，教程如下：x.com/WiseInvest513/… 一年的额度是 6.5 万，不计入外汇额度，就是和你一年 35 万的外汇额度没关系，随便用！ 9️⃣、保持长期定投，你不卖就不会有盈利记录产出，拿他 20 年，一定要那自己额外的钱进行定投，这样不会影响到你的日常生活！ 🔟、你说拿不住？ 如果拿不住，那就不用去购买美股了，如果你无法长期持有，那你永远无法致富，出门右转，自挂东南枝！

一位大哥分享的让普通人半年学会英语的土方法，感觉挺实用、挺接地气的。需要的可以学一下！

你们知道吗？潮汕富二代的破产率只有3%，而其他地区高达47%，整整相差15倍！ 为什么潮汕家族财富能代代相传？答案就藏在他们的教育方式里。 今年春节，我特意去潮汕拜年，各种去大家族蹭饭，结果被他们的聊天方式彻底震撼。 年夜饭桌上，我原本以为会聊孩子的成绩、哪个学校好，结果完全不是： 他们在聊—— 这个项目回款周期多久？ 那批货压了多少库存？ 这单利润率还有没有空间？ 现在的现金流紧不紧？ 旁边坐着的就是他们的孩子或孙子，有几岁的，有十几岁的。 没有一个人赶孩子去写作业，孩子就乖乖坐在那听，也不玩手机。 偶尔还会插一句： “那为什么不压价？” “那是不是可以换供应商？” 那一刻我心里很震撼： 我们大部分普通家庭，在孩子18岁前都把他隔离在真实世界之外； 而潮汕人，是把孩子直接泡在真实世界里长大的。 这次去潮汕，吴氏、周氏、陈氏等家族，所有男丁清一色穷养长大。 我问了好几个人，他们说：读大学父母只管学费和生活费，其他一律靠自己。 所以潮商有一个共同特点：对钱的理解，从十几岁就开始认真想赚钱的事。 前阵子很火的“深圳烤鸡少年”，我以前以为是摆拍台词。 去了潮汕才知道：他们从小泡出来，每个男孩子真的就是这么想的。 潮汕男人有“三不怕”： 1. 不怕苦 潮汕人早年出海做批发生意，跑东南亚，很多从最底层开始。 香港李嘉诚少年在茶楼打工，泰国首富谢国民也是白手起家。 在他们眼里，苦不是悲情，而是成本。从小训练的不是舒服，是抗压。 2. 不怕吃亏 来了潮汕才知道：吃亏是福。 从来没吃过亏的人，风险判断力几乎为零。 你不让他吃亏，他只会在你看不见的地方吃大亏。 很多有钱人允许孩子吃亏，是因为他们懂： 早亏100万是训练，晚亏一个亿是灾难。 市场不是学校，学校错了扣分，市场错了直接出局。 3. 不怕丢脸 这才是最狠的。 春节期间，潮汕但凡不打烊的饭店，基本都是自家孩子在端盘子上菜。 潮汕也是中国最会磕头的群体，一年磕的头比我们一辈子都多。 生意失败、负债，在他们那根本不丢人，没有“低谷期”，想的是怎么立刻重新开始。 哪怕从摆地摊开始，就一个字：干。 他们从来不把面子当资本，不怕低头、不怕重来、不怕被人看清。 真正厉害的家族，不是给孩子资源，而是给压力。 很多人以为潮汕教育是“吃苦教育”，其实不是苦，而是一套完整的社会压力系统。 他们对“生存能力”看得特别清楚。 这个时代最值钱的不是学历，而是交易能力： 能不能谈判？能不能识人？能不能算账？能不能承担决策后果？ 如果一个孩子从小只会考试，成年后最大的风险是什么？ 是他以为世界是公平的。 而商业世界从来不是公平的，是博弈。 直到真正进入市场，你才知道： 学历解决的是认知，市场解决的是生存。 一个人如果没经历过真正的交易环境，就永远不知道自己有多脆弱。 所以我已经决定了： 把我三个孩子的养育，全部按照潮汕男孩的标准来。 有钱人都应该学习潮汕人怎么教育孩子。 你们怎么看？潮汕式教育，真的香吗？

Kaspa’s evolution: from local scripts to stateful systems, without losing locality I want to try to explain, in simple words, the vision and the gradual implementation path for smart contracts and complex financial systems on Kaspa. Instead of trying to cover everything, I am going to weave one continuous line of thought: from the most basic primitives, through the key additions we are making, toward the system-level picture. A meta note: even in parts where the destination feels intuitively clear, conceptual clarity only emerges while building. This is not just engineering, and not pure theory either. It is system research: making the model itself clear as we walk. A simple ladder to keep in mind: • UTXO scripts constrain spend authorization • Covenants constrain next outputs • Lineage authenticates which instance is “the real one” • ZK verifies transitions by succinct proofs, without on-chain execution One guiding principle throughout: we want these capabilities as first-class consensus and script-engine primitives that compose cleanly, not as clever edge-case constructions. --- UTXO as the base model: a constitution that governs a resource The UTXO model is, at its core, a script (a “constitution”) that controls a resource. That constitution is local in two senses: • Local in space: the spending script sees only the inputs it spends, plus whatever data the spender provides. • Local in time: the script is a one-shot gate. Once a spend happens, the old constitution does not persist into the future. The future is governed by whatever new scripts the coins are sent to--but there is no inherent linkage between old rules and new rules. In the common case, the constitution is minimal: “only someone who can prove possession of a private key may spend”. In pseudo-form it is basically: SigVerify(pk). The spender provides a signature proving they control the private key behind pk, and that they authorized this specific transaction. --- The one thing that is enforced over time: conservation of value There is one strong temporal law baked into the base model: conservation of value. Consensus enforces that the total KAS value created by a transaction is less than or equal to the total KAS value it consumes. This is why “Kaspa the asset” is not just data in a UTXO. It is a native resource with a conservation law enforced by the protocol. So Kaspa already has one temporal invariant “for free”. --- But what if we want richer rules than “who can spend”? Now imagine we want more complex logic. Examples: • Coins can only be sent to a whitelist of addresses. • Only 5% of the balance can be spent per day. • This resource must evolve under a fixed policy over time. This is where the right mental model becomes a state machine. A state machine has a state and a transition function. The transition function must be able to enforce what the next state is allowed to be. In UTXO terms, “writing state” happens by creating the outputs of the spending transaction--so a real transition function must be able to constrain the outputs. The problem is the locality constraint: in the classic btc-style scripting model, without introspection, the spending script cannot constrain what it is creating. It gates the spend, but it cannot reason about outputs. Without seeing outputs, implementing a genuine state machine is impossible. (Notwithstanding btc’s indirect workarounds via sighash tricks, which can approximate limited introspection in specific patterns.) --- Introspection: enabling state machines in a local-compute model This is why transaction introspection opcodes are a foundational step. (This is what KIP-10 introduced, starting with Crescendo.) Once the script engine can read transaction fields, and crucially inspect output scripts, the transition function can finally say: “you may spend this input only if you create outputs that satisfy these constraints”. Conceptually, that is the birth of what we call a covenant: a spend is no longer pure ownership transfer. Spending becomes conditional on preserving a policy across time. It lets a resource enter a covenant: the owner’s freedom becomes constrained by an on-chain policy that must remain true after the spend, not only at the moment of spending. Note how this enables persistence without losing locality. The script only enforces a one-step look-ahead, by constraining the next outputs. But if it requires those outputs to carry the same policy forward, it becomes an inductive rule: one-step enforcement is enough to preserve the covenant across arbitrarily many future transitions. --- Completing the state machine model: primitives and lineage At this point we can describe covenants in principle, but to make general state machines possible we need two things: better building blocks, and a notion of authority for non-KAS state. (1) Byte and hash primitives: even if you can see outputs, you still need the low-level tools to express robust constraints. That means byte-string construction and parsing (e.g., OpCat, OpSubstr) and strong hashing with domain separation (e.g., OpBlake2bWithKey). Without these, you can’t reliably build commitments, slice out exact fields, or enforce consistent state encodings that make transition validation composable. (This is what KIP-17 added on TN12.) (2) Lineage (provenance): “who says this state is real?” Once a covenant represents non-KAS state (a token, an asset, or the compressed state commitment of an off-chain application), the state is no longer self-authenticating the way KAS value is. A short concrete story: • I can create a UTXO whose script claims “I am TokenX with supply 1,000,000”. • Nothing in consensus prevents me from writing that claim into a script and funding it with real KAS. • So the real question becomes: how do wallets know which instance is the real TokenX state machine? This problem only appears once “state” is no longer the native KAS resource, so it helps to separate the KAS case from the non-KAS case: • If the covenant is “about KAS”, the value already has native, consensus-backed provenance via conservation. You do not need lineage to prove the KAS value was not created from thin air. • For non-KAS state, there is no conservation law. Without lineage, you cannot prevent “fake instances” of the same-looking scheme. So for non-KAS covenants, lineage must be part of the design: the instance has to be anchored to a recognized genesis, meaning an agreed initial state and rules for a specific state machine instance, and then continued through valid transitions. KIP-20 addresses this by introducing consensus-tracked covenant IDs for instance identity and lineage. --- The next layer: ZK With covenants able to enforce transitions and lineage, we can move beyond “everything must be revealed and executed in-script on-chain”. This is already the direction on TN12 with ZK verification opcodes (KIP-16). Without ZK, each state transition must be validated on-chain by revealing what the base layer needs to check. In practice, every step tends to carry three costs: revealing the state preimage, revealing the rules preimage, and executing the transition checks in-script. ZK verification opcodes let us keep only commitments on-chain and prepare the public transition inputs, then a proof attests that there exists a valid hidden witness and execution trace that takes the old commitment to the new commitment under the intended rules. That gives scalability, and sometimes privacy. L1 enforces correctness without re-executing the full computation in-script, and without forcing state and rules to be re-published on every transition. The bigger consequence is expressiveness: ZK is machinery above covenants that lifts the “on-chain execution” ceiling. The base layer verifies validity, while the full transition function can be arbitrarily complex off-chain, including loops and large computations. In that sense, covenants plus ZK give a path to general-purpose computation anchored and enforced by L1. --- Outlook: Part 2 Part 2 will go deeper into the ZK layer and the shared-state story: • How a zk app can be based, meaning L1 sequencing fully determines the transition history. • How these primitives support canonical bridging of KAS. • How we further modify the base layer so multiple zk apps or vprogs can synchronously compose without waiting for base-layer messaging roundtrips.

痔疮土方 转： 本人也承患过痔疮，在一老者指导下，用一土方，己彻底好了！已30多年，再没复发过！ 具体方法： 将没加碘的食盐，放到锅里炒一下，待盐变色时，停火量凉放郑瓶子里备用！大便后，用一小盆放一小勺炒过的盐，加水洗肛门！一天便几次，洗几次！没有任何付作用！用一个好一个！