小恐龙说趋势

38 to 37: France passes it by one vote. From now on, swapping crypto for stablecoins will also incur a 31.4% tax 🦖

💡 群里更新数据解读

On October 17, France’s National Assembly passed amendment I-3898 during debate on the 2027 Finance Bill. The amendment was proposed by MP Nicolas Sansu. Of the Assembly’s 577 seats, only 100 members voted: 38 in favor, 37 against, and 25 abstentions. It was just one vote away from going the other way.

The amendment aims to close a loophole that has existed for years. Until now, swapping Bitcoin for stablecoins hasn’t counted as cashing out, so it hasn’t been subject to capital gains tax. Many French crypto holders have used USDT and USDC to park their profits, then swapped back into euros when the time was right. The rules are now set to change: every swap from crypto into stablecoins will be taxed at a capital gains rate of 31.4%. If the text passes unchanged, it will take effect on January 1, 2027 ⚖️

The French government’s reasoning is straightforward: stablecoins already serve as a means of payment and a store of value, so they should be taxed like money. The amendment also stresses that it would not create any new burden. What really stings is another set of figures: blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis estimates that 90% of crypto gains in France go undeclared. In 2024, just 24,000 French taxpayers declared approximately $427 million in gains. Compared with the size of the overall market, that reporting rate is practically zero 💶

In my view, the key issue isn’t the 31.4% rate. It’s that France is treating stablecoins as money rather than crypto assets for the first time. Once they’re taxed under the rules for money, every time you park your profits becomes a taxable event. The old strategy of moving into stablecoins during a bear market and cashing out again in a bull market is about to get a lot more expensive.

The second-order effects are more interesting than the tax rate itself. French crypto holders will most likely head in three directions: first, commodity-backed digital assets such as tokenized gold; second, self-custody and cross-border transfers; and third, simply converting back to fiat early and taking profits. For stablecoin issuers, retail demand in the eurozone’s second-largest economy will come under pressure. And with on-chain records, combined with the automatic information exchange under DAC8 and CARF, enforcing this tax will be much easier than many people think.

Of course, this isn’t the final word. The Senate will decide next Tuesday whether to advance the amendment. The government itself opposes it and could also remove the provision outright. The 38-to-37 vote shows that it doesn’t even have consensus in Parliament. There’s still plenty of debate ahead.

Do you think France is closing a loophole, or driving crypto users away? If you were there, would you convert back into euros early, or switch to tokenized gold? Let’s talk in the comments.

Every day, I bring you the latest crypto regulation developments—not just what’s happening, but the reasoning and opportunities behind the headlines 👀🚀

#美国ppi同比升至6.3%
$4.75 billion pulled out of global tech funds in one week, yet the Fed pointed the finger at AI itself 🦖
At the IMF and World Bank annual meetings in Bangkok on October 16, Fed Chair Warsh called the capital pouring into AI infrastructure an economic shock

🔍 进群聊行情

He said this wave of investment could push inflation higher in the short term, but he wouldn’t say a word about whether rates would move at the October 28 policy meeting

First, look at how it works: data centers, high-performance chips, power grids, and communications systems are all being built at once, competing for the same equipment, the same skilled workers, and the same electricity.
When supply can’t keep up, prices rise. Reuters reported that this is already affecting discussions about current and future monetary policy.
There’s another side to the story in the long run: automation and productivity gains could eventually lower production costs. But for now, central banks have to deal with the immediate pressure.

This isn’t an isolated view. The European Central Bank and other major central banks are watching the same trend.
More importantly, there’s an indicator called R-star—the neutral interest rate that neither stimulates nor restrains the economy.
If AI investment pushes up demand for capital across the economy, the neutral rate will rise, structurally narrowing the Fed’s room to cut rates in the future.

Markets have already started voting with their feet.
This week, U.S. PPI rose to 6.3% year over year. Brent crude hit $110 for the first time since May, and the 10-year Treasury yield stood above 5.1%.
The Nasdaq 100 fell 5.5% for the week, its biggest weekly drop in 18 months.
Credit default swap spreads for AI computing company CoreWeave widened sharply, while global tech funds saw $4.75 billion in outflows in one week.
Taken together, these numbers tell the same story: financing costs are repricing the AI trade ⚠️

Crypto, by contrast, looks relatively calm.
Bitcoin: $81,432, up 0.52% in 24 hours. Ethereum: $2,413.86, up 0.52%. SOL: $103.81, up 1.01%.
But don’t mistake calm for safety. With expectations of high interest rates, crypto isn’t a safe-haven asset—it’s a high-beta asset 🏦
The real dividing line isn’t whether AI will boost productivity. It’s whether AI capital spending can keep going on borrowed money.
If financing tightens first, the expansion of computing capacity will hit the brakes on its own, and inflationary pressure could ease sooner than the Fed expects.

My take: the market is still stuck in the old framework that AI equals disinflation, while the Fed has shifted to a new framework that sees it as a demand shock.
That gap in understanding is worth watching more closely than any single rate decision 💥
Do you think AI will ultimately bring inflation down or push it up? Let’s talk in the comments.
Tap my profile picture to watch the livestream.
Every day, I’ll keep you up to date on Fed and crypto market developments—not just what’s happening, but the logic and opportunities behind it 👀🚀

21.6 trillion BTT tokens sent into a black hole, in exchange for just $7.6 million 🕳️
BitTorrent completed its first buyback and burn on October 16, sending 21.6 trillion BTT tokens to a black hole address, worth about $7.6 million according to the announcement.

📢 ⏰ 消息群里第一时间说

The money didn’t come from fundraising. It was all the revenue from decentralized business in the third quarter of 2026—not a penny was held back.
On July 6, the team announced that it would use 100% of the revenue from its decentralized business for buybacks and burns every quarter. This is the first time it has actually followed through, and the on-chain records are public.
Even more interesting was what happened the next day. On October 17, BitTorrent released a new white paper, reframing the brand from its old P2P file-transfer roots as a three-part Web3 and AI infrastructure stack: the mainnet handles content distribution, BTTInferGrid provides decentralized GPU inference computing power, BTTC handles cross-chain and Layer 2 settlement, and BTT connects payments, staking, and governance across all these use cases.
Put simply, this is a classic narrative upgrade. The market used to see BTT as an old token in the TRON ecosystem. Now it’s pitching a new story about AI computing power and buybacks funded by real revenue. 🦖
The buyback is real, and the $7.6 million is real money. But relative to today’s market size, that’s not a huge figure. It’s unrealistic to expect it to support the price on its own. The real thing to watch is the mechanism: the buyback is funded by business revenue, not external financing. This kind of deflation is harder to fake than a buyback announced just to pump the price.
There are two things to watch next. First, can the buyback amount keep growing quarter after quarter? Second, will BTTInferGrid secure real computing-power orders and generate revenue? So far, the white paper lays out the architecture but provides no customer numbers or revenue breakdown. That’s the biggest gap between the narrative and actual performance. 🔥
The price has already moved. As of October 15, BTT was up about 30.3% over the past three months. The market has clearly priced in expectations early; now it’s a question of whether the business data can live up to them. 📈
Do you think this 100%-of-revenue buyback is genuine deflation or just a new narrative in disguise? Let’s talk in the comments.
Follow along every day for the latest Web3 infrastructure trends. I don’t just tell you what’s happening in the news—I help you understand the logic and opportunities behind it. 👀🚀
Tap the profile picture to watch the livestream

A cross-border transfer cut to 2 minutes—but three Wall Street giants all say the business is still very small

🚨 行情变了群里说

On this week’s U.S. banks’ third-quarter earnings calls, executives from Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, and Morgan Stanley all weighed in on tokenization. Goldman CEO David Solomon compared it to electronic trading replacing human-run trading desks 50 years ago. Wells Fargo CFO Mike Santomassimo was more direct: tokenized deposits are already in production, with cross-border transfers arriving in under two minutes. But not one of the three banks shared revenue figures. That’s the part worth thinking about most 🦖

First, the facts. Goldman launched its own tokenization platform, GS DAP, back in 2022. In July this year, it also took part in a half-day tokenized trading test run by the U.S. Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC), a clearinghouse that processes transaction volumes worth quadrillions of dollars a year. Solomon acknowledged that the business is currently very small—only a marginal part of the business. Wells Fargo’s tokenized deposits are genuinely in operation, but volumes are also very small. Without an extensive overseas branch network, the bank hopes to use tokenized deposits to compete for cross-border payments. Morgan Stanley’s take is more interesting: the faster and easier assets can move, the more clients need financial advice 📈

Here’s what that means: the three big banks aren’t here to disrupt themselves. They’re redefining tokenization. Wall Street once saw on-chain assets as a threat; now it sees them as new products, new customers, and new distribution channels. Goldman’s example of electronic trading from 50 years ago makes the point: back then, no one believed computers would replace trading desks. In the end, though, the trading business grew. But we should also be clear about the other side: none of the banks shared revenue figures. That suggests this is still an investment phase, not a harvest. For on-chain native projects, the real competition isn’t the technology—it’s the compliant customer base and clearing channels these banks already have 💥

More important still is the pace. Wells Fargo’s two-minute cross-border payments are already live. Morgan Stanley is focused on wealth management; Goldman is focused on trading. The fact that all three paths are moving forward at once suggests tokenization is shifting from pilot projects to infrastructure. Once clearing and custody are running smoothly, putting assets on-chain will no longer be just a concept—it’ll be the default option ⚖️

What do you think this wave of tokenization means: will Wall Street absorb the on-chain world, or will the on-chain world transform Wall Street? Let’s talk in the comments.

Tap the profile picture to watch the livestream.

Every day, we bring you the latest in crypto—not just what’s happening, but the logic and opportunities behind it 👀🚀

6.4 Million Bitcoin Publicly Called Out—About $525 Billion Is Within Quantum Computers’ Reach 🦖

📊 进群看每日策略

Nine crypto companies formed a quantum alliance this week. The figures they cited: the public keys of about 6.4 million bitcoin have been exposed, roughly 30% of the total supply. At $82,000 per coin, that’s nearly $525 billion. Around 1.1 million of those coins are attributed to Satoshi Nakamoto 💥

Let’s be clear: no one can steal these coins today, and no machine can do it. The alliance itself admits as much. What’s really keeping them up at night is the timeline.

A report modeled with contributions from two member companies marks March 2028 as an early window. New research from Google Quantum AI has pushed the number of qubits needed to break Bitcoin’s signatures below 500,000, while the Willow chip reduced errors in quantum-state preparation by about 40 times ⚠️

Put simply, this isn’t a price issue—it’s an ownership issue. Once elliptic-curve signatures can be reverse-engineered, wallets with exposed public keys are like having their private keys written on the door. Stablecoin minting permissions, cross-chain bridges, oracles, and governance contracts all rely on the same cryptography. Crack one key, and the effects could ripple across several platforms.

What the alliance wants to do is pretty straightforward: define what “quantum-ready” means and how to verify it. Right now, any blockchain can claim to be quantum-resistant, but no one can say exactly what that claim covers or what evidence is required. Following the model of the Internet Engineering Task Force, they’ve split into four working groups: migration, post-quantum zero-knowledge, wallet security, and cross-chain compatibility. Proposals will be judged only on public evidence and working implementations.

But the hardest part has never been the technology. It’s who gets to decide what happens to those 6.4 million coins. Freeze them, or let the holders migrate them themselves? Freezing them means trading ownership precedent for security. Not freezing them means leaving the risk with the people least likely to check their wallets. One custodian executive put it bluntly: “No one is responsible for this.” That’s the problem. Custodians protect client assets, not abandoned assets. Even within the alliance, there’s no agreement on freezing them ⚖️

My take: the quantum threat won’t show up in prices in the short term, but it will show up in the narrative first. Whoever turns post-quantum migration into a verifiable standard first will earn a vote of confidence from institutional investors in the next funding cycle. People are already placing bets: a consortium backed by BlackRock, Strategy, and a certain exchange has put up $15 million. A certain exchange is also urging developers to start migrating immediately, saying the process could take years. The real time cost isn’t the moment the code is cracked—it’s the decision everyone has to agree on at the same time.

Do you think those 6.4 million bitcoin should be frozen, or should the market work it out on its own? Let’s talk in the comments 👀

Tap the profile picture to watch the livestream

Every day, we bring you the latest on quantum computing and Bitcoin—not just what’s happening, but the logic and opportunities behind the headlines 👀🚀

New buyers quietly scoop up 570,000 Bitcoin at an average cost of $75,000—now sitting on $3.7 billion in unrealized gains

🔎 进群看完整分析

An exchange’s on-chain research team revealed on X that new buyers have accumulated around 570,000 Bitcoin since the end of July, at an average cost of about $75,000. Meanwhile, spot Bitcoin ETFs have been selling, with net outflows of $82.3893 million yesterday alone. 🐋

What does this mean? At the current price of $81,500, this stash is worth around $46.4 billion. Against a cost basis of $42.7 billion, that’s roughly $3.7 billion in unrealized gains—a return of 8.6%. It may not sound like much, but we’re talking about 570,000 Bitcoin, or 2.86% of the circulating supply. 🦖

More importantly, consider the cost basis. $75,000 isn’t just some random number. The report says that every pullback since August has held above this cost zone. In other words, these new buyers haven’t been shaken out—instead, they’ve kept buying the dip. Coins are moving from ETFs and short-term investors into a new group of wallets with a highly concentrated cost basis.

This isn’t retail traders placing orders on an exchange. These are actual spot coins withdrawn on-chain. The report didn’t name the buyers, but the timing lines up perfectly with the ongoing outflows from ETFs. On one side, institutional products are seeing redemptions; on the other, new wallets are accumulating on dips. The two groups are taking completely opposite views of the same market.

But there’s another side to this: the more concentrated the cost basis, the more fragile the support. The current price is only 8.6% above their average cost. If Bitcoin falls below $75,000, those 570,000 coins go from unrealized gains to losses—and from support to potential selling pressure. And unlike ETFs, these holders don’t have a creation-and-redemption mechanism, so they could move faster. ⚠️

My take: $75,000 has become more than just a price level—it’s a dividing line in the market structure. Above it, $46.4 billion worth of newly acquired coins are holding the line. Below it, the same level could trigger a cascade of stop-losses. Bitcoin is now at $81,500, just one step away from that line. The key thing to watch next isn’t whether it can break $82,000, but whether $75,000 holds during a pullback. 📉

Let’s discuss in the comments: do you think these new buyers are smart money, or bagholders waiting to get caught out in the next round?

Every day, I bring you the latest Bitcoin trends—not just what’s happening, but the logic and opportunities behind it. 👀🚀

Tap my profile picture to watch the livestream

1.378 billion ADA sitting in the treasury, but only 42.6 million left to spend. Nobody can touch the ten-plus billion in between 🦖

📊 进群看每日策略

The spending cap for this Cardano budget cycle is 500 million ADA. As of October 17, 30 funding proposals have been approved, totaling 457.39 million ADA, or 91.5% of the cap.

That leaves 42.604 million ADA, worth about $9.5 million at the current price of $0.22. This amount has to last until the end of June 2027 📉

First, let's clarify how the mechanism works. The cap is called the Net Change Limit. It governs the total amount approved for spending during a cycle, not the treasury balance. This cycle began on February 13, 2026, and covers epochs 613 through 713, with each epoch lasting five days. The previous cycle's cap was 350 million ADA, so this one is about 43% higher. It's not a protocol upgrade, but an InfoAction with no technical effect, which received support representing 62.35% of staked ADA in epoch 647.

Where has the money gone? Four grants alone account for over half: 120 million ADA for AlphaGrowth's Cardano PRIME program, 62.1 million ADA for a maintenance project by Input Output and Ensurable Systems, 50 million ADA for a joint fund with Draper Dragon, and 32.9 million ADA for Cardano Vision 2026.

The other side is even more telling. This year, 29 proposals totaling 230.73 million ADA expired without getting enough votes. The most recent was for 11.787 million ADA to bring OpenZeppelin to Cardano for security work; it expired in epoch 661. Other proposals included 20 million ADA for Builder DAO, 39.8 million ADA for Tweag infrastructure, and several attempts to fund Cardano Summit 2026. None passed ⚠️

There is now just one proposal up for a vote: 22 million ADA, or about $4.9 million, for US company Toto Finance to buy COMEX Grade 1 copper cathodes, store them in a US warehouse, and mint CuTT tokens, each representing one pound of copper. The copper will be held for 18 to 24 months, and the proceeds from sales, along with any unspent funds, will be returned to the treasury within 36 months.

Breaking it down: 14.7244 million ADA for copper purchases (66.93%), 2.64 million ADA for technology and project management, 3.5339 million ADA for external operations and auditing, 441,700 ADA for execution, and 660,000 ADA for independent oversight. The proposal says it will prioritize hiring a US member firm of PwC for independent oversight, but no contract has been signed yet.

If this proposal passes, just 20.604 million ADA will remain under the cap. So the significance of this vote isn't the $4.9 million; it's that it would cut the remaining headroom in half. Voting closes at the start of epoch 668, which, at the current pace, is November 15. A decision could come at any epoch boundary before then; the next one is October 21 🧾

My take: the treasury holds about 1.378 billion ADA, up from 1.337 billion ADA in epoch 650. That shows the protocol itself isn't short of funds; what's scarce is the authorization to spend during this cycle. This design turns governance into budget politics: large grants lock up the available headroom, while small teams have to wait for the next cycle. And the 29 failed proposals show that DReps are already tapping the brakes.

The copper proposal is even more interesting. A public-chain treasury is starting to buy physical commodities, shifting the narrative from funding development to experimenting with assets. If it makes money, the treasury gets the proceeds; if it loses money, the treasury takes the hit. Using governance funds to experiment with RWAs means the risks and rewards aren't evenly balanced.

Do you think the treasury should spend 22 million ADA on copper? Let me know in the comments.

Tap the profile picture to watch the livestream.

Every day, I bring you the latest crypto trends—not just what happened, but the logic and opportunities behind the headlines 👀🚀

133 accounts, RMB 500 million, an average of about RMB 3.76 million passing through each account—and the man was hiding in a Bangkok mansion 🦖

🕐 最新解读群里更新

Thai immigration police recently detained a 37-year-old Chinese man at a mansion in Bangkok. He was wanted by Chinese police on suspicion of involvement in a transnational criminal network and handling cross-border funds. The total transaction volume exceeded RMB 500 million, or nearly THB 2.5 billion ⚖️

He wasn’t using the money to trade crypto. Instead, he turned cryptocurrency and foreign exchange into a channel for moving funds. Police say he used more than 133 accounts to handle crypto assets and currency exchanges for the group, and also helped members of the network obtain visas. To avoid being found, he forged proof-of-residence documents, frequently changed his license plates, and even altered the appearance of his vehicle.

The figure of 133 accounts is more telling than the RMB 500 million. Divide 500 million by 133, and about RMB 3.76 million passed through each account on average. This wasn’t one person’s wallet—it was an entire matrix of accounts. Behind every account, there was likely someone willing to lend out their identity. The accounts belonged to others, but he was the one operating them. The money changed form as soon as it passed through 💥

My take is straightforward: cases like this aren’t about crypto itself, but the settlement layer. Here, cryptocurrency served one purpose: moving money across borders in minutes, then converting it back into local currency through foreign exchange. On-chain transfers leave a trail, but once funds enter centralized platforms and over-the-counter currency exchanges, that trail starts to break. So in the end, the case was cracked not through blockchain analysis, but because the suspect was physically in Bangkok.

For ordinary users, the real risk isn’t market volatility—it’s your account. Lending someone your bank card, collecting or sending money on someone else’s behalf, or exchanging currency for a friend may seem like small favors. From a law enforcement perspective, though, you could be one link in the chain. This time it was 133 accounts. Next time, it could be yours ⚠️

Thailand will first deal with his visa overstay, then coordinate his deportation. The investigation isn’t over; it will likely lead to the people who provided the accounts and the over-the-counter currency exchangers.

What do you think about using cryptocurrency and over-the-counter currency exchange as infrastructure for this kind of operation? Share your thoughts in the comments.

Tap the profile picture to watch the livestream.

Every day, we bring you the latest crypto trends—not just what’s happening, but the logic and opportunities behind it 👀🚀

HK$14 million, 21 people reported it, 4 arrested: a scheme passing off OTC shares as digital assets 🦖

📣 盘面异动群里喊

The Commercial Crime Bureau of the Hong Kong Police is investigating a company called BBB Group, whose Chinese name is 好好好集团 (Good Good Good Group). It claims to invest in the agarwood industry in Malaysia, while selling OTC shares and digital assets. It also promised to convert investors’ OTC shares into cryptocurrency by February 2027 at the latest.

As of today, 21 investors have reported the case, involving a total of HK$14 million—an average of about HK$667,000 per person. Police have opened a case on suspicion of conspiracy to defraud, and 4 people have been arrested.

What we should really be wary of isn’t agarwood, but the sales pitch: first, they sell you an invisible, intangible plantation; then they give you a certificate for OTC shares; finally, they say it will all be converted into digital assets in the future, pushing the payout date months down the line. There’s no on-chain address, no custodian, and no redemption terms anywhere in the process—just a timeline.

The Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission’s website has already listed four products as suspicious investments: Malaysia Agarwood Plantation Investment, Agarwood Tree Scheme, Agarwood Potted Trees, and APT4. This means regulators had publicly warned people about the risks before the police made any arrests. Many people simply didn’t check.

My take is that we’ll see more cases like this, as the tokenization narrative gains momentum. Genuine tokenized securities have a contract address, a licensed custodian, and a clear redemption process. Fakes have only a story and a date. The test is simple: ask them to show you the on-chain contract and custody arrangements on the spot. If they can’t, they don’t have them.

HK$14 million, 21 families, 4 people—behind these figures is a very old scam in a new disguise ⚠️

Has anyone around you been persuaded by claims about converting OTC shares into digital assets? Share your thoughts in the comments 📉

I bring you the latest in crypto regulation every day—not just what’s happening in the news, but also the logic and opportunities behind it 👀🚀

#纳指100本周跌5.5%创18个月最大周跌幅
Nasdaq Falls 5.5% in a Week, Its Worst Drop in 18 Months—Yet He Said It Was Poised to Take Off the Same Day 🦖
Tom Lee, chairman of crypto treasury company BitMine, said on CNBC on the 16th that cryptocurrencies, chip stocks, and neocloud companies had all corrected to support levels. As long as fundamentals remain stable, he said, the risk-reward profile is quite attractive.

📈 进群一起分析行情

He didn’t say how much they might rise. But by discussing all three sectors together, his meaning was clear: fear has pushed their prices down to similar levels.

Risk assets really took a beating this week. The Nasdaq 100 fell 5.5% for the week, its biggest weekly drop since April 2025. Brent crude hit $110 for the first time since May, the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield climbed back above 5.12%, and U.S. PPI rose to 6.3% year over year.
Three forces are moving together: oil prices drive inflation, inflation holds back rate cuts, and interest rates weigh on valuations. 📉

Crypto hasn’t been spared. Bitcoin was at $81,587, down 0.43% over 24 hours; Ethereum was at $2,435, down 0.51%; and SOL was at $104.94, down 1.35%.
The flows tell an even clearer story: spot Bitcoin ETFs saw net outflows of $82.3893 million yesterday, with Fidelity’s FBTC leading the way at $10.609 million in net outflows. ⚠️

Put simply, Tom Lee’s argument isn’t that he’s bullish—it’s about the odds. When fundamentals haven’t deteriorated but sentiment has pushed prices down to support levels, the downside and upside are no longer balanced.
But there’s a catch: fundamentals have to remain stable. And right now, that’s precisely what’s most uncertain. Oil at $110 and PPI at 6.3% mean the Fed still has room to tighten policy again. A 10-year yield of 5.12% continues to put pressure on high-valuation assets.

So support isn’t a floor. It’s simply a point where the odds look better. To see a real turning point, watch for two things: whether oil prices can retreat from $110, and whether ETF flows can turn positive after net outflows.
Until then, any talk of an imminent takeoff could amount to just a rebound—not a reversal.

Do you think this is the start of a rebound, or just another leg down? Let’s talk in the comments.
Every day, I’ll bring you the latest crypto market trends—not just what’s happening, but the logic and opportunities behind the headlines. 👀🚀

Europe has suddenly made its position clear: the digital euro isn’t a pilot project—it’s meant to stand alongside cash 🦖

📢 ⏰ 消息群里第一时间说

At the IMF’s annual meeting on October 17, European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde said that eurozone inflation was 3.8% in September, driven mainly by energy prices. The energy shock could keep inflation above target through the first half of 2027. In the same speech, she outlined another track: the digital euro is in the works to complement cash and support everyday payments.

The timing matters. On September 21, the ECB launched Pontes, enabling institutions to settle tokenized assets using central bank money—a direct answer to private stablecoins. Full deployment is scheduled for 2028.

On one side is wholesale finance: settling tokenized bonds and funds with central bank money. On the other is retail: using the digital euro for everyday payments. By covering both ends, the eurozone is aiming for more than just another currency. It wants to keep the foundations of payments and settlement in its own hands ⚖️

That’s the exact opposite of the US approach. The US is letting dollar stablecoins expand globally, while Europe is regulating stablecoins first. On October 15, the European Banking Authority designated Circle’s USDC as the EU’s first significant e-money token. It will come under the new regulatory framework from November 12. First, Europe is building the framework; then it will roll out its own alternative.

For ordinary holders, the most immediate impact is that there will be less room for euro stablecoins. Under the current design, the digital euro will pay no interest and have a holding limit. It’s not intended for speculation; it’s targeting payment use cases, not investment demand. So don’t expect it to trigger a crypto price rally 📉

What’s really worth watching is the spillover effect. If Europe gets wholesale settlement working, will other central banks follow suit? Once more sovereign funds move onto their own networks, private stablecoins’ share of cross-border settlement could gradually be eaten away. This won’t happen overnight—it’s a structural shift that will play out over five years.

The market’s attention is elsewhere for now: Bitcoin at $81,619, down a slight 0.6% over 24 hours; Ethereum at $2,433; and the odds of an October rate hike have fallen to around 15%. Risk appetite is recovering, but this quiet battle over payment infrastructure isn’t about crypto prices. It’s about who gets to collect transaction fees in the next cycle.

My take: in the short term, the digital euro is neither bullish nor bearish. It’s a signal that sovereign currencies are starting to take on-chain settlement seriously. The era of high-margin stablecoins will gradually be squeezed, but the overall market for on-chain assets will grow. Both things can happen at once 😅

What do you think? Once central bank digital currencies become widespread, will stablecoins be pushed to the margins—or will they become a complement to central bank systems? Let’s talk in the comments.

Every day, I bring you the latest on central banks and stablecoins around the world—not just what’s happening, but the logic and opportunities behind the news 👀🚀

$388 million stolen. Three weeks later, this exchange began cutting off services to some users 🦖

🕐 最新解读群里更新

On September 25, an exchange confirmed unauthorized transfers and temporarily suspended withdrawals. At the time, the widely reported loss was $178 million. Later, a security firm revised the figure to about $388 million, and the vulnerability was classified as a zero-day. This Saturday, the platform issued another announcement, saying it would terminate services for some customers in a one-time action. Funds are safe, it said. Those affected will be notified by email, in-app messages, and push notifications. Anyone who hasn't received a notice can continue using the platform as usual.

The announcement didn't name the affected users or disclose any selection criteria. It simply stressed one thing: use official channels only, and beware of phishing links and people impersonating customer support. Coming at this point, that sounds a lot like a final step in a targeted account purge: remove affected and risky accounts first, then deal with compensation and accountability.

In my view, the most important thing to remember isn't the $388 million figure itself, but how it changed. It took just a few weeks to go from $178 million to $388 million. That shows why initial estimates of losses from a hacking incident in its first three days are generally unreliable. On-chain tracing, identifying asset ownership, and tracking cross-chain transfers all take time. By the time the full picture emerges, the market has long since moved on.

The more practical point is that ordinary users face risks beyond the day of the theft. Suspended withdrawals, restricted accounts, and long customer-support queues—these secondary harms are often more frustrating than price swings. Keeping a large amount of assets on a single platform essentially hands someone else control over your options. Diversification, cold wallets, and withdrawal whitelists may seem like a hassle in ordinary times, but when things go wrong, they're lifelines.

There are two things to watch next. First, will the platform publish a compensation plan and timeline? Second, will other platforms follow suit and carry out similar account cleanups? The first will determine whether users can get their money back; the second will determine whether this crisis of trust spreads ⚠️

Let's talk in the comments: would you still dare to keep most of your holdings on an exchange? 👀

Every day, I bring you the latest in crypto security—not just what happened, but the logic and opportunities behind the headlines 🚀

Tap my profile picture to watch the livestream

#celestia推出ai智能体测试链eden
Doubled in a month, up 49% in a week—this once-leading modular blockchain project is still 96% below its all-time high

🧭 群里聊方向

Celestia’s TIA is now at $0.737, up 12.6% in 24 hours, 48.9% in 7 days, and 112% in 30 days 🦖

Its market cap has climbed back to $724 million, with $315 million in 24-hour trading volume—more than 40% of its market cap. The price has also hit an 11-month high 📈

This isn’t a rally driven by just one asset. Over the past two weeks, capital has clearly rotated out of Bitcoin and Ethereum into smaller-cap assets with higher volatility. Bitcoin has been seesawing around $81,000, while Ethereum has been fluctuating around $2,400. With BTC and ETH going nowhere, investors are turning to other narratives.

On the news front, the market is digesting Celestia’s launch of Eden, an AI agent testnet. Modular blockchain plus AI agents is one of this year’s most combustible combinations. The potential of a single testnet is enough to draw in short-term traders.

But don’t overlook two figures. First, the circulating supply: 982 million tokens are already on the market, out of a total supply of 1.18 billion. That means 83% of the tokens are already in circulation, with layers of holders above waiting to break even. Second, the valuation: TIA peaked at $20.85 in 2024. Now it’s worth only a fraction of that, down 96.5% 💥

In other words, this doubling may sound impressive, but essentially it’s bounced from the floor to the doorway of the basement. It’s still a whole cycle away from its former peak.

My take: this is a combination of short covering and narrative rotation, not a fundamental reversal. Rising volume is a good sign, but we need to see the price hold above $0.80 and volume stay strong for several consecutive days before talking about a second leg. If it falls back below $0.60, this move will look more like a one-off spike—and anyone chasing the rally could be left holding the bag ⚠️

Let’s talk in the comments: do you think this TIA rally is a return of the narrative, or one last pump before a sell-off?

I bring you the latest crypto market developments every day—not just what’s happening, but the logic and opportunities behind it 👀🚀

#布伦特原油自5月来首次触及110美元
Down 5.5% in a week, while oil surged past $110. Risk assets are already feeling the strain 🦖

🔭 进群看资金去哪

The Nasdaq 100 fell 5.5% over the week, its biggest weekly drop since the tariff turmoil of April 2025. The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index has fallen for eight straight trading days, its longest losing streak since 2008, with a decline of about 16% over that period. On the same day, Brent crude rose to around $110 a barrel, while WTI gained 3.8% in a day to $101.71. The 10-year U.S. Treasury yield climbed to 5.097% 📉

What really stands out is the AI infrastructure sector. Yields on some CoreWeave bonds briefly topped 15%, and the stock plunged 12% on Friday, putting it more than 50% below its high for the year. The market is shifting from asking whether there’s enough computing power to asking when capital spending will start paying off. Even ARK is adding to its positions in CoreWeave and Cerebras at a time like this. Some see a buying opportunity; others see a falling knife ⚠️

The knock-on effect on crypto is straightforward: higher oil prices fuel inflation expectations, long-term interest rates rise, and expectations for liquidity tighten. High-volatility assets get sold first. Bitcoin is currently at $81,496, down 0.74% over 24 hours. Ethereum is at $2,426, down 0.8%. SOL is at $104.81, down 1.03%. The declines aren’t catastrophic, but the direction is clear.

My view is that this isn’t a crypto-specific story. It’s about the AI trade being repriced. For the past two years, the market has assigned limitless value to computing power. Now it’s starting to price in the cost of financing. Bond yields at 15% tell us more than most on-chain data. As long as the 10-year Treasury yield stays above 5%, any rebound in risk assets is likely to be a recovery, not a reversal 💥

Two numbers are worth watching: whether Brent can hold above $110, and whether the 10-year Treasury yield reaches 5.2%. The former shapes inflation expectations; the latter determines the denominator in valuations. If neither turns around, it’ll be hard for crypto to make an independent move.

Do you think this is excess being squeezed out of the AI bubble, or crypto getting unfairly caught in the crossfire? Share your thoughts in the comments 👀

Tap the profile picture to watch the livestream

Every day, we bring you the latest developments at the intersection of global macro and crypto—not just what’s happening, but the logic and opportunities behind it 🚀

#以太坊跌破2400usdt
$152 million flowed out of Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs in a single day, with $141 million coming from the same issuer 🦖

🔎 进群看完整分析

On October 16, U.S. Eastern Time, spot Bitcoin ETFs saw net outflows of $82.3893 million, while spot Ethereum ETFs saw net outflows of $69.6827 million. Ethereum ETFs have now recorded net outflows for three consecutive trading days. Two BlackRock products led the outflows: IBIT saw $71.7803 million leave, and ETHA saw $69.6827 million leave. Together, that’s $141 million, or 93% of the day’s total outflows 💸

Let’s lay out the numbers. Spot Bitcoin ETFs still have total net assets of $104.290 billion, equal to 6.35% of Bitcoin’s total market cap, with cumulative historical net inflows of $56.878 billion. Spot Ethereum ETFs have total net assets of $14.946 billion, equal to 5.07% of Ethereum’s total market cap, with cumulative historical net inflows of $12.940 billion. The money isn’t moving out on a large scale; it’s just edging away from the margins.

But one detail is worth watching: nearly all of the $69.6827 million in Ethereum ETF outflows came from a single product, ETHA. That suggests redemptions aren’t happening across all issuers; instead, investors are reducing positions in the largest product. ETHA’s cumulative historical net inflows still stand at $12.494 billion, so this outflow is barely a drop in the bucket ⚠️

Now let’s look at prices. Ethereum briefly fell to $2,392.90 overnight, still about 51% below its all-time high of $4,946.05 on August 24, 2025. Bitcoin, meanwhile, held above $81,000. In other words, ETFs are seeing outflows, but prices are holding firm. The fact that both are happening at once is what’s most worth thinking about today 📉

My take: this looks more like quarter-end portfolio rebalancing than a mass institutional retreat. With net assets accounting for just 5.07% of Ethereum’s market cap, traditional capital is still only lightly invested in Ethereum. The real risk isn’t the size of a single day’s outflows, but how many consecutive days they continue. If outflows persist into next week, that would be more than rebalancing—it would signal a change in sentiment.

What do you think: are these consecutive ETF outflows a sign that institutions are pulling back, or is this just rebalancing? Share your thoughts in the comments 👀

Tap the profile picture to watch the livestream

Every day, I bring you the latest on crypto capital flows. We don’t just cover what’s happening—we help you understand the logic and opportunities behind it 🚀

Cut ETH by 80–90% and switch to Nvidia—Sun Yuchen’s move is far more honest than simply being bullish or bearish 🦖

💬 群里一起聊行情

At an in-person conversation lasting 3.5 hours, TRON founder Sun Yuchen publicly disclosed his personal asset allocation. He hasn’t sold a single Bitcoin from his core holdings over the past year. But he reduced his Ethereum holdings by 80–90% when ETH was trading between $3,600 and $4,000. He’s now keeping only about 20% as a core position and waiting to see what happens—and he hasn’t bought back in. Most of the money from those sales went into U.S. stocks.

He made two things very clear: Bitcoin is a core holding, while Ethereum is an aggressive asset. So the aggressive part can be cut, while the core holding stays untouched.

In U.S. stocks, Nvidia is his main position—a core holding in the AI sector, held in size with no plans to reduce it. The Nasdaq 100 is also a large position. He’s slightly bearish on it in the medium term, citing crowded trades and high interest rates, but he hasn’t shorted it and is keeping his position. As for China’s A-shares, he has no holdings 💥

Most interesting is his concern about Bitcoin. He said he worries about the impact of quantum computing and AI algorithms, and believes the market hasn’t fully priced in this risk. Even so, he’s sticking with his Bitcoin holdings—he’s just moved them into cold wallets for safekeeping. Acknowledging that the risk isn’t priced in while still refusing to reduce his position feels more genuine than the many people who only know how to be bullish.

My take: this shouldn’t be read as bearishness on crypto. It’s a reshuffling of the aggressive part of his portfolio. The core holding hasn’t moved; only the aggressive allocation has. And he puts Ethereum in the aggressive bucket. That’s the opposite of the instinct most people have to treat ETH as a core holding 📊

Let’s do the math: he sold between $3,600 and $4,000, and Ethereum is now around $2,400. He really did sidestep this downturn, which was about 30%. Meanwhile, Nvidia and the Nasdaq have benefited from AI-related valuations. He’s not betting that crypto is dead—he’s moving his high-beta exposure to a different sector 📉

What’s worth watching is this: if more large holders start classifying ETH as an aggressive position rather than a core holding, Ethereum’s store-of-value narrative will weaken. This shift is more worth tracking than the price itself.

Do you consider Ethereum a core holding or an aggressive position right now? Let’s discuss in the comments.

Every day, I’ll help you follow the latest Bitcoin and crypto market trends—not just what’s happening, but also the logic and opportunities behind it 👀🚀

HEX founder who raised over $1 billion detained in Istanbul; apartment contained $4 million in cash and 64 luxury watches 🦖

📈 进群看今日思路

Turkish media outlets IHA and Daily Sabah reported that on Wednesday morning, Istanbul police took Hex and PulseChain founder Richard Heart, whose real name is Richard James Schueler, into custody at a residence in the Beşiktaş district that had been under surveillance. His wife was also with him. The operation was assisted by the National Intelligence Organization (MIT), with the Financial Crimes Department involved.

The red notice was issued in December 2024 at Finland’s request, in connection with aggravated tax fraud charges. Finland is also seeking him over an assault allegation. To be clear, though, a red notice is a request for police in different countries to help locate someone; it is not an arrest warrant. He remains a suspect, and Turkish authorities say there is no decision yet on whether to extradite him to Finland. ⚖️

The inventory from the scene is even more eye-catching. One Turkish media outlet reported that police found around $4 million in cash, 64 luxury watches, as well as firearms, computers, and crypto-mining machines. Another reported $600,000 in cash and 24 watches. Neither the police nor Interpol has released an official inventory. The conflicting figures suggest the case is still at a very early stage.

This isn’t the first time he has faced legal action. In 2023, the U.S. SEC sued Heart, Hex, PulseChain, and PulseX, alleging that they offered unregistered securities and raised more than $1 billion. It also alleged that he spent at least $12 million of investors’ funds on supercars, luxury watches, and a 555-carat black diamond called The Enigma. But in February 2025, a federal judge dismissed the civil lawsuit for lack of personal jurisdiction. In April of the same year, the SEC abandoned its attempt to amend the complaint. The civil route had hit a dead end, and now a criminal tax case has taken its place.

The market has already voted with its feet. After the news broke, Hex fell 25% to 45%, while PulseChain’s PLS dropped 35% in a single day. Hex was already down to a tiny fraction of its former value, having fallen more than 99% from its 2021 peak of around $0.44. 💥

My take: the most vulnerable part of these old-school narrative coins has never been the technology—it’s the founder. The project sells personality worship, and the token’s price is anchored to that person’s credibility. Once the founder is detained, with no financial statements, no board, and no practical path to recourse, holders don’t even know who to turn to. That’s why the same enforcement news is just noise for Bitcoin, but a reason to dump everything for coins like these.

Do you think founder-personality coins like this still deserve another chance at a comeback? Let’s talk in the comments. 👀

I bring you the latest crypto-regulation stories every day—not just what happened, but the logic and opportunities behind the headlines. 🚀

Google cut quantum computing errors by 40x—but only 8 out of every 100 attempts succeed. And for those old bitcoins mined by Satoshi, the keys to move them may already be lost 🦖

📊 进群看每日策略

In an experiment published in Science this week, Google’s Willow quantum chip reduced the error rate for preparing magic states by about 40x. The states that passed verification had a fidelity of 99.99%, but only about 8 out of every 100 preparations made the grade. It’s an impressive engineering milestone—but the work is far from finished.

Many people are treating this news as another “quantum computers are coming for Bitcoin” false alarm. What really matters isn’t the 40x figure, but which part of the problem it solves.

The most expensive part of a quantum attack has never been the computation—it’s the preparation. Before a machine can crack a wallet, it has to continuously produce a resource called magic states. Each one is used once and then discarded. In a paper published in March, Google estimated that a simulated attack on a public key would take about 9 minutes. During those 9 minutes, the machine would need to consume around 500,000 sufficiently reliable magic states every second.

The significance of this experiment is that it shows these resources can be produced using less hardware—not that the cost of cracking Bitcoin has suddenly been divided by 40. The March estimate already assumed that magic states could be produced efficiently, so the two figures can’t be multiplied together. This is engineering progress, not a countdown.

But engineering progress adds up. In March, Google put the threshold at fewer than 500,000 physical qubits. In September, researchers cut the workload for one key computational step in half. Step by step, that number is getting smaller.

The bigger problem is the old coins.

According to a warning cited by CoinDesk, the public keys for about 6.4 million bitcoins have already been exposed on-chain. The coins mined by Satoshi in Bitcoin’s early days used P2PK outputs, which means their public keys have been on the ledger since day one. There’s no need to wait for the owner to make a transaction. And upgrading to a quantum-resistant signature scheme requires the private-key holder to sign the migration themselves. If the private key is lost, the coins are stuck forever—and remain exposed forever.

There’s already been some movement on-chain. On October 7, an address that hadn’t moved since July 2010 transferred 100.02 bitcoins. It had been dormant for more than 16 years; the coins were worth about $8.5 million. In August, six wallets from 2011 to 2014 also moved a combined 553.59 bitcoins, worth about $40 million at the time. This doesn’t necessarily mean anyone is preparing for quantum computers, but it does show that some old coins are waking up.

My view is simple: quantum computers aren’t coming in the short term, but this is the kind of risk you can lose to by doing nothing. If the price falls, you can wait. If the signature scheme becomes obsolete, waiting won’t bring your coins back. ⚠️

Let’s talk in the comments: Do you have any holdings in your wallet that haven’t moved in more than five years? If you had to migrate to a new signature scheme today, would you know what to do first? 🔐

Every day, I bring you the latest crypto market trends—not just what’s happening, but the logic and opportunities behind the headlines 👀🚀

#solanaalpenglow升级将于10月21日激活
Nearly $97 million more in one quarter: Solana app revenue rose 48%, but nobody can verify the figures 📊

📣 盘面异动群里喊

According to Solana, application-layer revenue in the third quarter was $299.1 million, up 48% from approximately $202 million in the second quarter. The figures cover July through September, with a net increase of about $97 million for the quarter.

The problem is the lack of detail. There’s only a total—no methodology, no breakdown by app, and no independent third-party verification. The network hasn’t explained exactly what the $299.1 million includes: protocol fees, app charges, or MEV revenue. It also hasn’t said whether there’s any double counting. And to be clear, this is money earned at the application layer, not by the Solana protocol itself. The two shouldn’t be conflated.

A 48% rise looks impressive, but fees are denominated in SOL, so the dollar figure can be amplified by the token’s price. The report doesn’t separate how much came from genuine growth in on-chain activity and how much was just a conversion effect. If the increase is concentrated in two or three high-volume apps, users leaving just one app could wipe out the quarter’s growth.

On a daily basis, that works out to about $3.3 million in revenue per day in the third quarter, compared with roughly $2.2 million in the second quarter—a daily increase of $1.1 million. But this is revenue at the application layer, not profit, so it can’t be used directly to value SOL. And 48% is just quarter over quarter; the report itself acknowledges that it can’t confirm the year-over-year trend.

Meanwhile, the price hasn’t kept up at all. Solana is currently at $104.21, down 0.78% in 24 hours and 5.13% over the week, with a market cap of about $61.4 billion. Annualized, the quarter’s $299.1 million comes to roughly $1.2 billion—less than 2% of its market cap 🦖

A catalyst is just around the corner: the Alpenglow upgrade activates on October 21, targeting a reduction in finality from 12.8 seconds to 150 milliseconds—about 85 times faster. But it addresses performance, not demand. The key things to watch are whether fourth-quarter revenue can top $299 million and when a breakdown by app will be provided ⚠️

My take: this looks more like a report card that deserves a discount. The growth may be real, but 48% shouldn’t be treated as a fundamental turning point just yet 📉

Do you think this 48% reflects real demand, or is it a one-off boost? Let’s discuss in the comments 👀

Tap the profile picture to watch the livestream

Every day, I’ll help you follow the crypto trends—not just what’s happening, but also the logic and opportunities behind the headlines 🚀