Patience

458 posts

Patience banner
Patience

Patience

@jofee3

认清现实,放弃幻想。

Katılım Aralık 2012
373 Takip Edilen914 Takipçiler
Patience retweetledi
蓝狐
蓝狐@lanhubiji·
两家与以太坊(ETH)相关的上市公司(Sharplink SBET 和 BitMine BMNR),将在2026年6月29日(美股开盘)正式被纳入美国Russell指数。 目前情况是: SBET(Sharplink) 确认加入 Russell 2000(小盘股指数)和 Russell 3000 BMNR(BitMine) 进入初步名单(preliminary),有望加入 Russell 3000,并有较大概率进入 Russell 1000(大盘股指数) 怎么理解? 想象美国有个超级巨大的被动投资“自动购物系统”——比如那些被动指数基金、ETF、养老基金、401k计划等。 它们不自己挑股票,而是严格按照Russell指数名单里有哪些公司、占多少权重,就自动买入多少。 这次SBET和BMNR被加进名单,相当于: 给 SBET和BMNR 打开了“被动资金的闸门”,让几百万不炒币、不懂以太坊的普通投资者,也会自动持有它们,相当于把以太坊的机会推向了传统金融的主流通道。 具体说来, 全世界跟踪Russell 2000和Russell 3000的资金规模非常庞大(万亿美元级别)。 一旦正式纳入,这些基金就必须买入相应股票来匹配指数。 以前,往往只是主动研究加密的投资者才会去买这些股票。 现在进了指数后,那些“懒得选股、只买指数基金”的主流投资者(包括大量散户和机构),他们的钱也会自动流向 SBET 和 BMNR。 相当于把以太坊相关的投资机会,自然而然地塞进了美国传统金融的主流投资组合里。 被动基金买入会形成真实的需求,尤其在纳入生效前后,往往会带来股价的短期支撑(所谓的“指数纳入效应”)。 长期看,也会提升股票的流动性和机构持有比例(很多成熟公司被动持有比例能达到20-25%以上)。 需要说明的是,被动基金买的是 SBET和 BMNR的股票,不是 ETH。基金为了匹配指数,必须买入这两只股票,不会直接跑到交易所买 ETH。不过,会间接推动公司买更多 ETH。
中文
81
11
113
14.2K
Patience
Patience@jofee3·
@Murphychen888 也许人家只是觉得难得碰到圈内人,简单想聊一聊认识一下
中文
1
0
0
125
Murphy
Murphy@Murphychen888·
刚刚,一位爷叔走过来问:“小伙子,你玩比特币吗?”, 我一愣,瞬间秒懂:“纪念币?没听说过。” “哦~~我看你这天幕是币安的,我还以为你是…” “我闲鱼上淘的,便宜” 他半信半疑看了一眼,走了… 我惊讶不已,不知爷叔是何方高人,拿退休金炒币么?😂😂😂
Murphy tweet media
中文
112
3
195
137.9K
Patience
Patience@jofee3·
@ohyishi 帮人按电梯门这种在中国也很常见
中文
0
0
0
554
Patience
Patience@jofee3·
加密行业已经被CZ搞烂了。SBF如果能被赦免,或许能给加密带来一些新思路和新机遇。他在AI上的布局确实是眼光独到很有远见。现在的市场基本上停滞了,毫无创新,只有一堆meme币和VC项目;如果在监督下给他机会,让他结合AI和加密,说不定能推动一些实质进展。爆炸头确实犯了错,但像他这样的有才华的人不多见,也许是应该考虑让他试着弥补,带领行业往前走。 CZ都能交钱来获得赦免凭啥爆炸头就不行?
中文
0
0
0
42
Patience retweetledi
硅谷王川 Chuan
硅谷王川 Chuan@Svwang1·
Ai agent 和传统软件开发相比,虽然仍有大量安全性和不确定性的瑕疵,但想象空间最大的地方是: 一, 可以自己改进自己的源代码 二, 可以自发的寻找新的方法来实现某个目的 三, 可以自发的在开放的空间和外界其它 ai agent 进行复杂的价值交换,来完成以前传统软件根本无法完成, 也无法想象的任务。 尤其是第三点,如果在支付手段上达成共识,大量ai agent 自发的,不间断的协作,演化,这就有生命体的雏形了. 目前的 open claw 之类的工具还属于玩具,但他有潜力在现在的硬件 os 之上构建一个抽象层,变成用户和硬件交互的主要方式. 这还了得,微软和苹果绝对不可能允许这种事情发生,肯定会构建自己的 ai agent 生态,依靠自己的强大分发能力把竞争者边缘化。 尽管如此,绝大部分开发者最终结局仍然只是凑热闹的炮灰,因为他们并没有一丁点垄断性的优势,纯粹靠 ai agent 和热钱带来的多巴刺激在维持着。 未来大概率会有现在无法想象的新的商业模式可以成功捕捉价值。就像微电脑革命始于 1975年,但你完全可以冷眼旁观,躺平十一年到 1986年微软上市后再出手,再躺平 40年收获四千倍的回报。
硅谷王川 Chuan tweet media
中文
1
37
159
24.8K
Patience
Patience@jofee3·
@Lennart_up Grateful? We, who trusted you and invested real money, have ended up with nothing. Damn, crypto is full of scams.the crypto is stagnant because of scam projects like yours. Anyone who believes in these crypto concepts is a complete idiot.
English
0
0
4
81
Lennart 🎢🟦
Lennart 🎢🟦@Lennart_up·
I want to share some context behind the Backroom decision. It wasn’t easy. We truly loved the project we started in March last year. The original product was an onchain alpha marketplace, with ROOM as the utility token to access backrooms and curated information. One of our core ideas was to move away from token speculation as the primary project use case and instead build a product where users could make money through onchain alpha. We raised via @virtuals_io, selling 37.5% of total supply at a very low $150k FDV. The trade-off made sense at the time because of Virtuals’ staking-for-points system and the distribution Virtuals provided. In the first 3 months, it worked. ROOM reached an ATH at $22.5M, that’s over 150x from raise for people. I’m proud of that. We launched the product on @base, and people genuinely had fun. Many found profitable alpha. But when the staking system was removed, and Onchain activity dropped, it became hard to keep momentum and traction. Also: Hype moves fast, and fades just as fast. Once the flywheel breaks, rebuilding it becomes difficult. Some might have given up here or just maintained it until no one cares. However, we did not. a small but strong community of active users and creators was forming and continued iterating ideas with us. That led to our pivot: turning Backroom into an incubator and go-to-market platform. The thesis: Early projects need aligned users and trusted distribution. And users want early access and upside. Backroom had that community. It felt like a natural fit. The first raises executed successfully. So much that @AerodromeFi recognized our effort and joined forces with us as the liquidity hub for launches. However, the model proved highly time-intensive. Curating quality raises requires deep sourcing, due diligence, and alignment with the right teams. That process does not scale easily. At the same time, market conditions deteriorated. Teams delayed launches. Onchain activity declined. Competition among launchpads intensified. Finding strong projects became increasingly difficult. Return on effort and investment declined for the Backroom team and our community. But we still continued iterating. The builder coin thesis was the final structural attempt: pricing builders instead of single products, allowing multiple shots at product–market fit. We held advanced discussions with multiple capable teams and came close (2 times very close) to several launches. But ultimately, timing and priorities did not align. Over the past months, meaningful ROI did not materialize while operational costs persisted, and activity within the Backroom ecosystem declined further. At some point, structural reality becomes clear: If the market does not naturally pull a product forward, forcing it will not create traction. Continuing simply to keep it alive would be a misallocation of time and capital. Not everyone will agree with this decision. That is understood and natural. But building in crypto means operating in open markets. Markets validate, or they don’t. Backroom delivered real outcomes: People found alpha. People made profits. We built, tested, and executed multiple models under real conditions. I’m grateful to everyone who participated in the journey and the friends we made along the way. We take the lessons and will build again. On to the next chapter. Hope to see you around. 🤝🟦
Backroom@useBackroom

x.com/i/article/2022…

English
17
2
30
6.1K
vitalik.eth
vitalik.eth@VitalikButerin·
There have recently been some discussions on the ongoing role of L2s in the Ethereum ecosystem, especially in the face of two facts: * L2s' progress to stage 2 (and, secondarily, on interop) has been far slower and more difficult than originally expected * L1 itself is scaling, fees are very low, and gaslimits are projected to increase greatly in 2026 Both of these facts, for their own separate reasons, mean that the original vision of L2s and their role in Ethereum no longer makes sense, and we need a new path. First, let us recap the original vision. Ethereum needs to scale. The definition of "Ethereum scaling" is the existence of large quantities of block space that is backed by the full faith and credit of Ethereum - that is, block space where, if you do things (including with ETH) inside that block space, your activities are guaranteed to be valid, uncensored, unreverted, untouched, as long as Ethereum itself functions. If you create a 10000 TPS EVM where its connection to L1 is mediated by a multisig bridge, then you are not scaling Ethereum. This vision no longer makes sense. L1 does not need L2s to be "branded shards", because L1 is itself scaling. And L2s are not able or willing to satisfy the properties that a true "branded shard" would require. I've even seen at least one explicitly saying that they may never want to go beyond stage 1, not just for technical reasons around ZK-EVM safety, but also because their customers' regulatory needs require them to have ultimate control. This may be doing the right thing for your customers. But it should be obvious that if you are doing this, then you are not "scaling Ethereum" in the sense meant by the rollup-centric roadmap. But that's fine! it's fine because Ethereum itself is now scaling directly on L1, with large planned increases to its gas limit this year and the years ahead. We should stop thinking about L2s as literally being "branded shards" of Ethereum, with the social status and responsibilities that this entails. Instead, we can think of L2s as being a full spectrum, which includes both chains backed by the full faith and credit of Ethereum with various unique properties (eg. not just EVM), as well as a whole array of options at different levels of connection to Ethereum, that each person (or bot) is free to care about or not care about depending on their needs. What would I do today if I were an L2? * Identify a value add other than "scaling". Examples: (i) non-EVM specialized features/VMs around privacy, (ii) efficiency specialized around a particular application, (iii) truly extreme levels of scaling that even a greatly expanded L1 will not do, (iv) a totally different design for non-financial applications, eg. social, identity, AI, (v) ultra-low-latency and other sequencing properties, (vi) maybe built-in oracles or decentralized dispute resolution or other "non-computationally-verifiable" features * Be stage 1 at the minimum (otherwise you really are just a separate L1 with a bridge, and you should just call yourself that) if you're doing things with ETH or other ethereum-issued assets * Support maximum interoperability with Ethereum, though this will differ for each one (eg. what if you're not EVM, or even not financial?) From Ethereum's side, over the past few months I've become more convinced of the value of the native rollup precompile, particuarly once we have enshrined ZK-EVM proofs that we need anyway to scale L1. This is a precompile that verifies a ZK-EVM proof, and it's "part of Ethereum", so (i) it auto-upgrades along with Ethereum, and (ii) if the precompile has a bug, Ethereum will hard-fork to fix the bug. The native rollup precompile would make full, security-council-free, EVM verification accessible. We should spend much more time working out how to design it in such a way that if your L2 is "EVM plus other stuff", then the native rollup precompile would verify the EVM, and you only have to bring your own prover for the "other stuff" (eg. Stylus). This might involve a canonical way of exposing a lookup table between contract call inputs and outputs, and letting you provide your own values to the lookup table (that you would prove separately). This would make it easy to have safe, strong, trustless interoperability with Ethereum. It also enables synchronous composability (see: ethresear.ch/t/combining-pr… and ethresear.ch/t/synchronous-… ). And from there, it's each L2's choice exactly what they want to build. Don't just "extend L1", figure out something new to add. This of course means that some will add things that are trust-dependent, or backdoored, or otherwise insecure; this is unavoidable in a permissionless ecosystem where developers have freedom. Our job should make to make it clear to users what guarantees they have, and to build up the strongest Ethereum that we can.
English
2.6K
1.6K
10K
6.4M
Patience
Patience@jofee3·
@BTCdayu 下一轮依然有 减半,熊了很久等等。。。
中文
0
0
0
1.3K
大宇
大宇@BTCdayu·
上一轮熊市的时候,当时在最低位置赶抄底,主要是摆在我前面有好几个重大利好。 比如etf通过,减半,熊了很久等等 下一轮呢?靠什么,兄弟们? 现在不是微策略,而是其他高位买币的公司,开始陆续卖币了。比如gme
allincrypto 熬鹰资本 🇨🇳@thankUcrypto

我以为现在已经是比特币的死亡螺旋了,从9万到5万不过两周时间。 结果早上微策略财报电话会议看完,现在他们如果真卖币偿还债务,那都还好。等大饼再跌一跌,4w 3w 2w再卖币,就卖不上价了,到时候还一分钱就要卖三分币,这才是真死亡螺旋。 saylor早上对股东们重申卖币后,已经看到好几位项目老板开始卖出自己手中代币了。

中文
20
12
42
122.6K
Patience
Patience@jofee3·
@0xhiger 同为生涯最大难度的一次🥲
中文
1
0
0
67
HIGER
HIGER@0xhiger·
跌到这里才能看清自己的幼稚与不足,想起cz之前说到的“超级周期”,相信很多小伙伴还买过“超级周期”的中文meme,只可惜我们没有清醒认识到别人是开“赌场”的,咱们是没能力谈“超级周期”的,上一个谈论“超级周期”的三件箭资本在市场里早已没了声音。 好币不代表一定能涨,超级周期也不代表现在就会上涨,这个过程中的任何买入行为,都是我们心理不堪承受之重。 这个周期也成为海哥生涯最大难度的一次。
中文
5
0
10
5.2K
Patience
Patience@jofee3·
@0xYond 现在情况是跟2019年很像,很多项目方搞不下去了,很多人才离开这个行业。
中文
0
0
0
159
Yond (DeFi Arc)
Yond (DeFi Arc)@0xYond·
我21年进圈,22年3月入行,经历了22-23年的熊市,一直到现在,我觉得这轮熊市我是有危机感的。我觉得这轮熊市跟上一轮的几个不同点: 1) 项目方也没钱了。 22-23 虽然价格熊,但是找工作还是好找的。那会 Crypto VC 因为退出周期比 IPO 短,正在风投圈兴起。很多项目方在熊市都靠投资人活得很滋润,每天 Space Discord 活动做得飞起。 我22年入行,最高记录同时给5个项目方/社区/VC打工。那时候工作非常好找,英文好写作好就能有不少的工作机会。现在进来的人多了很多,Crypto VC 该发币退出的都退出了,发不出币的也都清盘了。项目方没了投资人输血,靠真实业务赚钱的可能不到1%,这1%还会被熊市惨淡的交易活动影响,收入缩水。 如果你是25-26入圈的兄弟,假设你的硬实力/背景过关(跟我当年一样)现在打工,还得靠行业经验+熟人网络。如果我是你,我会超级绝望,还好我积累了几年不错的工作经验。 2) 理财难度增加了。 就像我昨天发的,现在的DeFi对治理/贿赂/激励越来越不看重了,好像只剩下存款能玩。22-23 那会每天都能找到些矿/盘子玩,只要IQ过关是可以活得很舒服的。22年1-2月份我就专门找tomb fork来玩,2个半礼拜将4000刀滚到20000刀。 现在Pendle这种直接把盘子给你端走了,对协议的理解已经不能让你站在食物链顶端赚钱了。你智商再高,也只是用户群体里比较高阶的,而项目方看重的是跟机构接轨,跟主流资金玩,散户你再有钱能有几个钱? 21-22年因为有 Anchor/UST,那会稳定币理财对标的都是20%,盘子越大越不容易崩盘,每天都挖得爽飞了。现在都在拥抱合规,存USDC/USDT,赚个8%年化,积分还要看狗项目方的脸色 3) 撸毛难度也在飙升。 我入圈真正赚到的第一桶金是靠肝 Discord 白名单,再靠场外群变现,那会应该是撸毛版本的最初形态。后面有堆号/堆机器的玩法,甚至有撸毛工作室。再到现在,项目方几乎不看测试网的数据了,测试网投入再多烧再多的gas都不如去建设「社区」,所以我24年做了小熊之家,也是我目前在crypto career里的高光时刻。 结果证明我是对的。就是因为撸毛带来太多低质用户和机器人,项目方直接把这条路砍了。想要参与一级分配,要么去build社区,要么去存钱,要么去嘴撸。项目方也精得很啊。撸毛用户画像的改变也是体现了投资人对项目方的不满意,搞一堆虚假繁荣的测试网数据。无脑刷交互的版本已经过去了。 现在已经不是1011带来的流动性问题了,是行业红利全面都在萎缩,拥抱大资本,个人力量再消退。从25年2月份开始我就在危机感中度过,到现在大跌这刻终于能把我的真心话说出来了😭
Yond (DeFi Arc) tweet media
中文
54
21
256
73.7K
TechFlow 深潮|APP 已上线
TechFlow 深潮|APP 已上线@TechFlowPost·
Star早起,剑指币安。 认为 10 月 11 日加密闪崩是币安不负责任的 USDe 理财活动导致的。 总结一下就是: 币安提供12% USDe年化收益并允许其作为保证金,引发用户将USDT/USDC大规模转换为USDe。 用户利用规则进行循环借贷(Looping),人为制造高达70%+的年化收益,导致系统性风险隐蔽积累。 市场波动触发USDe脱钩,引发WETH、BNSOL等资产的连环清算,造成全球范围内的严重亏损。
Star_OKX@star_okx

No complexity. No accident. 10/10 was caused by irresponsible marketing campaigns by certain companies. On October 10, tens of billions of dollars were liquidated. As CEO of OKX, we observed clearly that the crypto market’s microstructure fundamentally changed after that day. Many industry participants believe the damage was more severe than the FTX collapse. Since then, there has been extensive discussion about why it happened and how to prevent a recurrence. The root causes are not difficult to identify. ⸻ What actually happened 1.Binance launched a temporary user-acquisition campaign offering 12% APY on USDe, while allowing USDe to be used as collateral with the same treatment as USDT and USDC, and without effective limits. 2.USDe is a tokenized hedge fund product. Ethena raises capital via a so-called “stablecoin,” deploys it into index arbitrage and algorithmic trading strategies, and tokenizes the resulting fund. The token can then be deposited on exchanges to earn yield. 3.USDe is fundamentally different from products such as BlackRock BUIDL and Franklin Templeton BENJI, which are tokenized money market funds with low-risk profiles. USDe, by contrast, embeds hedge-fund-level risk. This difference is structural, not cosmetic. 4.Binance users were encouraged to convert USDT and USDC into USDe to earn attractive yields, without sufficient emphasis on the underlying risks. From a user’s perspective, trading with USDe appeared no different from trading with traditional stablecoins—while the actual risk profile was materially higher. 5.Risk escalated further as users: •converted USDT/USDC into USDe, •used USDe as collateral to borrow USDT, •converted the borrowed USDT back into USDe, •and repeated the cycle. This leverage loop produced artificial APYs of 24%, 36%, and even 70%+, widely perceived as “low risk” simply because they were offered by a major platform. Systemic risk accumulated rapidly across the global crypto market. 6.At that point, even a small market shock was sufficient to trigger a collapse. When volatility hit, USDe depegged quickly. Cascading liquidations followed, and weaknesses in risk management around assets such as WETH and BNSOL further amplified the crash. Some tokens briefly traded near zero. The damage to global users and companies—including OKX customers—was severe, and recovery will take time. ⸻ Why this matters I am discussing the root cause, not assigning blame or launching an attack on Binance. Speaking openly about systemic risks is sometimes uncomfortable, but it is necessary if the industry is to mature responsibly. I expect there may be significant misinformation and coordinated FUD directed at OKX in the near future. Even so, speaking honestly about systemic risk is the right thing to do—and we will continue to do so. As the largest global platform, Binance has outsized influence—and corresponding responsibility—as an industry leader. Long-term trust in crypto cannot be built on short-term yield games, excessive leverage, or marketing practices that obscure risk. The industry needs leaders who prioritize market stability, transparency, and responsible innovation—not a winner-take-all mentality where criticism is treated as hostility. Crypto is still early. What we choose to normalize today will determine whether this industry earns lasting trust—or repeats the same mistakes again.

中文
32
18
144
55.9K
Yi He
Yi He@heyibinance·
想要Exchange the world,推动世界变化时,往往会伴随着大量讨论、质疑和不同声音。这并非某一个行业独有,而是所有结构性变革在历史中反复出现的过程。围绕加密行业与币安的讨论来源复杂,既有市场周期带来的情绪波动,也有不同商业竞争与模式、立场的分歧。 与已经经历了数百年甚至上千年发展与用户教育的传统资产相比,加密行业仍然处在相对早期阶段,波动和争议在所难免。站在这个历史的转折点,黄金和白银的FOMO并不意外,由于时间滞后效应,属于我们的比特币(数字黄金)时代终将到来。 没想到推特几年后变成了和几年前微博一模一样,希望所有社区的朋友们在吃瓜之余,自己做好独立判断与风险管理,保管好自己的资产,DYOR。
中文
1K
96
903
519.4K
Patience
Patience@jofee3·
@0xAA_Science 又当又立,把币圈搞的乌烟瘴气,吃相太难看!
中文
0
0
3
812
0xAA
0xAA@0xAA_Science·
都是 cz 的错? cz 干啥了
中文
126
0
70
88K
XinGPT🐶
XinGPT🐶@xingpt·
这句话是真的:如果你在30天前买了白银 那么你的收益比四年前买了eth拿到现在的人还多 If you bought silver 30 days ago, then your returns would be higher than those of someone who bought ETH four years ago and held it until now.
XinGPT🐶 tweet media
中文
5
0
12
5K
Patience retweetledi
向阳乔木
向阳乔木@vista8·
真心觉得纳瓦尔宝典讲的更接地气,不贩卖焦虑。
中文
24
126
572
48.1K
Patience
Patience@jofee3·
@dotey 用过codex, cc,gemini,确实codex写的代码最稳,基本上都是一次通过。
中文
0
0
0
185
宝玉
宝玉@dotey·
我现在写代码尽量用 Codex,其他任务用 Claude Code。 Codex CLI 虽然不好用,但是模型好,写代码稳,并且 Token 量大。 Claude Code 好用,模型写代码不如 Codex,但是通用任务执行的更好。 这里其实 OpenAI Codex 团队是要反思一下后续走向的,空费了这么好的模型,整天做些华而不实的更新。
Rays@sage_rabi

@dotey 宝玉老师用下来觉得codex与Claude Code有什么区别吗?

中文
78
34
438
130.9K