Mhozeez 1

🚨You Can Now Buy Apple and Tesla Stock On Telegram •••••••••••••••••••••••••• A friend sent me a screenshot last week of his STONfi wallet holding something called TSLAx and asked if it was a scam. It wasn't. It was Tesla stock, tokenized, sitting in his TON wallet next to his USDT. xStocks landed on STONfi as tokenized versions of real equities like Apple, Tesla, NVIDIA, the S&P 500, and a growing list of others issued by Backed Finance and validated with Kraken's backing. Each token is fully collateralized 1:1 by actual shares held with a regulated custodian. You're not buying a synthetic derivative that tracks a price from a distance. You're holding a token that represents legal ownership of real stock, and you can get it the same way you'd swap any other asset on STONfi using GRAM or USDT with no brokerage account required, no KYC, and no waiting three business days for settlement. I'll be honest about what actually suprised me at first. it doesn't feel like investing, It feels like swapping one token for another, because that's literally what the interface treats it as. You're not filling out an account application or proving your income data. You connect a wallet you already have and trade. That accessibility comes with real trade-offs worth being clear-eyed about. xStocks aren't available to residents of the US, the EU/EEA, the UK, Canada, Australia, or Belgium. The regulatory conditions for tokenized securities still varies wildly by jurisdiction, and eligibility gets checked accordingly. Dividends aren't paid out to you directly either, the issuer automatically reinvests them back into more of the token, adjusted through a scaling factor, so the economics work differently than a normal brokerage dividend deposit. This isn't an investment advice to buy tokenized Tesla stock. What i'm saying is that the fact we can now technically buy from inside a messaging app, without a broker, is a bigger shift in stock trading for traders. $CMC20 @ston_fi

💡STONfi Has a Safety Net for LPs Most People Never Look For •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• My first real lesson in impermanent loss came from a pool I was genuinely excited about. Price moved a lot on one side, I pulled my liquidity out weeks later, and the total value was noticeably behind what I would've had by just holding both tokens separately. Nobody tricked me. That's just what happens when the ratio between two assets in a pool shifts significantly while your capital is inside a pool. Here's what I didn't know at the time I never knew that STONfi actually built a program specifically to compensate liquidity providers for exactly this kind of loss. It's part of the platform's own development history alongside the usual swap fees and farming rewards, STONfi rolled out a protection mechanism aimed at offsetting impermanent loss for LPs, on top of advanced liquidity features like sniper protection and a referral fee vault. That's a genuinely uncommon thing for a DEX to build. Impermanent loss protection isn't free, it means the protocol is setting aside real liquidity to backstop LPs against a risk that, on most DEXs, is treated as entirely the liquidity provider's problem to manage alone. Building that kind of program is a signal about how a protocol thinks about the people actually supplying its liquidity, not just the traders swapping through it. what do you think about such a program as an LP @ston_fi $GRAM

🚨BITCOIN HAS BEEN REJECTED AT 81K Bitcoin has been rejected at $81k after a strong rally from the lows of 61k during last week. WHERE COULD THE NEXT STOP FOR BTC BE? The bulls are currently loosing grounds as more and more bears gather at that highs of 79K. If this price rejection holds firmly, we might be seeing BTC plummet to test the bulls at 72k or 69.5k price levels for a new round of demand. WHAT DO YOU THINK? lets know in the comments👇 $BTC #Bitcoin Price Prediction: What is Bitcoins next move?#

📑DEX Fees: Where Does Your 0.3% Actually Go? •••••••••••••••••••••••••• You Pay a Fee on Every Swap. Almost Nobody Asks Where It Goes. Every time I swap on a DEX, there's a small fee i get to pay for the trade to be successful. Usually somewhere around 0.3%, give or take depending on the pool. I used to just accept that as "the cost of doing business" and never thought about where it actually lands. It's worth knowing, because it explains a lot about how DEXs are actually designed. Most of that fee doesn't go to the protocol team. It goes straight to the liquidity providers, the people whose tokens are sitting in the pool making your trade possible in the first place. That's the core deal of an AMM-based DEX. you pay a small cut on your swap, and that cut is what makes it worth someone else's while to keep capital parked in that pool instead of just holding it in a wallet. Different pools charge different rates, and it's not random. Stablecoin-to-stablecoin pools like USDT to USDC usually carry much lower fees, because the price barely moves between the two assets, so there's less risk for the liquidity provider to be compensated for. More volatile or exotic pairs tend to sit at the standard rate or higher, since the liquidity providers are taking on more price risk by being in that pool. Some protocols also route a small slice of that fee to a treasury or a token buyback instead of sending 100% of it to liquidity providers. its worth checking before you assume every basis point is going straight to LPs. So in essence, the fee isn't the protocol taking a cut out of your trades. It's the price of borrowing someone else's liquidity for a few seconds. Once you see it that way, comparing DEXs wont just about who has the lowest fee, it'll be about who's using that fee structure to actually attract enough liquidity to give you a good price in the first place. $STON

📑HOW LIQUIDITY IS SOURCED AFTER YOU CLICK ''SWAP'' ON A DEX ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• The first time I swapped a token on a DEX, I assumed there was some invisible buyer on the other side, like a normal exchange. The truth is that there isn't. There's just a pool. Think of it like a big shared bucket of two tokens that other users deposited and you're trading against that bucket, not against a person. HERE'S THE BASIC MECHANICS OF HOW THAT WORKS Say a pool holds TON and USDT. When you swap TON for USDT, you're adding TON to the pool and pulling USDT out. That shifts the ratio between the two tokens, and the ratio is what sets the price. Buy enough of one side and you'll notice the price creeping against you that's not the app being unfair, that's just the pool rebalancing in real time as you drain one side of it. The people who deposited the tokens in the first place ''the liquidity providers'' aren't doing it for free. Every swap that goes through the pool pays a small fee, and that fee gets split among everyone who has capital sitting in that pool. More trading volume through the pool, more fees for the people providing liquidity. NOW, HERE'S THE PART THAT SUPRISES ME Providing liquidity isn't automatically profitable. If the price of one of your two tokens moves a lot while your funds are sitting in the pool, you can end up with less value than if you'd just held the tokens separately. It's called impermanent loss, and it's the main thing that separates people who understand pools from people who gets burned in a pool. To conclude, a pool isn't a black box, it's just two token balances and a formula deciding the exchange rate between them. Once you see it that way, the rest of DeFi farming, fees, even impermanent loss stops feeling like magic and starts feeling like math. i hope you learnt something from this! $GRAM @ston_fi

🚨NOBODY TELLS YOU THIS WHEN YOU PROVIDE LIQUIDITY •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

The first time I added liquidity to a DEX, I thought I'd found free money. Drop in two tokens, sit back, collect fees. A few weeks later I pulled it out, ran the numbers, and realized I would've made more just holding both tokens in a wallet and doing nothing.

Nobody warned me on why i shouldnt have done it that way. Turns out it's not bad luck it's just how a normal AMM works. SO WHAT HAPPENS EXACTLY?

When you provide liquidity the old-fashioned way, your capital gets spread across the entire price curve. But think about what that actually means. 90% of your money is parked at prices the asset will probably never trade at again, quietly doing nothing, while a thin amount near the current price is the only part actually earning fees. You're getting paid on maybe a tenth of your own capital and calling it a return.

This is the exact thing concentrated liquidity was built to fix, and it's what STONfi is bringing to TON this quarter.

Instead of blindly spreading your liquidity everywhere, you pick the price range you actually expect the asset to trade in. Same capital, tighter range, way more of it working at once. If you're right about the range, your fee earnings per dollar go up substantially because you're not subsidizing price levels that will never get touched.

Why this matters for TON specifically Liquidity across the chain is already thin, and every dollar sitting idle in a pool is a dollar that isn't helping depth, isn't tightening spreads, and isn't pulling in traders. Concentrated liquidity doesn't require new capital to fix that. It just makes the capital that's already there work harder.

I wish someone had explained this to me before my first LP position. Now STONfi is just building the fix directly into the protocol.

Not financial advice. DYOR

#DeFi #ConcentratedLiquidity $GRAM

📑HOW POOLS AND FARM YIELDS ARE ACTUALY GOTTEN ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• I almost aped into a 25% APY pool. Then I checked to see where the 25% was actually coming from which then led to this opinion of mine. So i recently scrolled through STONfi's pool list and saw the GRAM/JETTON pair showing a 25.0% APY which looks great until you break it down. So here's how this goes, only 1.08 percentage points of that comes from trading fees the remaining 23.07 points are reward emissions. Same story on STON/USDT 14.25% total APY, but just 0.81% is fee driven, 13.44% is reward subsidized. If you zoom out to the protocol level, the organic-fee picture becomes more clearer. STONfi's trading volume is roughly 0.446% of volume in total fees, of which the protocol itself keeps about 24.3% as revenue the rest goes to LPs. That's the real, sustainable yield floor. Everything above it in a pool's advertised APY is a reward subsidy that ends whenever the emission schedule does. None of this means these pools are bad. The reward-boosted yield is a legitimate LP strategy if you're clear about the timing. It just means the number on the pool card isn't the number that survives after the incentives. ADYOR @ston_fi

🚨STONfi's swap volume dropped 26% in a single month ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Looking at STONfi's trailing 30-day numbers, youll see that the DEX volume is down 25.7%, but TVL is down only 5.1%, and fees fell just 2.2% in the same window The bigger part of this is that, If capital were genuinely leaving the protocol, you'd expect TVL and fees to fall roughly in line with volume, but it didn't.
What that combination usually means in practice is that LPs are staying put with the average daily volume still standing at $2.58M
and the pool is still turning over roughly 3x its TVL every 30 days which is actually crazy if you ask me.
The only difference between the statistics of trading within 2 months ago and now is that the frequency and size of trades has cooled off more than the underlying liquidity base has. That's a demand-side signal (fewer/smaller swaps), not a liquidity flight signal.

For an LP, that distinction changes the read entirely and here's how👇 A falling volume, stable TVL month reads as "quieter market, which is still the same liquidity risk but doesnt mean the protocol is declining. Theres currently a boosted Farm with reasonable APR on STONfi where you can multiply your rewards for simply staking STON and farming in the STON/USDT v2 pool which qualifies your farm rewards to get an APR multiplier with extra rewards paid in STON Stake 500+ STON → you'll get up to 1.5× farm APR Stake 1,000+ STON → you'll get up to 2× farm APR 🔗https://app.ston.fi/staking SOURCE ---> DeFilama

NFA, DYOR @ston_fi $STON

📑UNDERSTANDING THE FAULTS IN OFF-CHAIN DEPENDENCIES OF SMART CONTRACTS ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Smart contracts are supposed to be unhackable, but they have a huge weak spot which ill be explaining in this content. lets get into it👇 Think of a smart contract like a high-tech vending machine. The code inside works perfectly every single time, but it doesn’t actually know the price of anything outside itself. To check prices like how much Ethereum is worth right now, it has to ask an outside source, which is called an ORACLE. NOW, THATS WHERE THE PROBLEM BEGINS If a hacker corrupts or tricks that outside price feed, the smart contract blindly believes the wrong number and hands over the cash or liquidity. But looking at such exploit from a bigger picture, youll realize that the the code itself didn't break, it just acted and responded due to a lie it was given. In short, your secure computer program is only as safe as the outside info you feed or give it. HERE'S A RESEARCHED WAY I FOUND THAT EXPOSED HOW HACKERS TRICK SMART CONTRACTS👇 The first method often comes through Market manipulations, and then flash loan attacks, and latency exploits regularly breach systems without ever violating the underlying smart contract code. Relying on simple price averages or isolated validator nodes leaves billions exposed to subtle, economic-level attacks. WHAT COULD BE A SOLUTION TO STOP THE EXPLOITS? After trading with certain DEXs across Solana, Ton, Aptos and Injective, I've realized that most of these DEXs have improved their security systems in solving off-chain vulnerability which requires moving past simple data delivery toward cryptographic proofs, multi-source verification, and low-latency validation systems that can survive targeted market manipulation. A typicall example is STONfi which is built on GRAM(prev. TON). So if for any reason you happen to trade on TON, be rest assured that your assets and their solution is safe, audited and smooth. @ston_fi

📑UNDERSTANDING THE FAULTS OFF-CHAIN DEPENDENCIES IN SMART CONTRACTS ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Smart contracts are supposed to be unhackable, but they have a huge weak spot which ill be explaining in this content. lets get into it👇 Think of a smart contract like a high-tech vending machine. The code inside works perfectly every single time, but it doesn’t actually know the price of anything outside itself. To check prices like how much Ethereum is worth right now, it has to ask an outside source, which is called an ORACLE. NOW, THATS WHERE THE PROBLEM BEGINS If a hacker corrupts or tricks that outside price feed, the smart contract blindly believes the wrong number and hands over the cash or liquidity. But looking at such exploit from a bigger picture, youll realize that the the code itself didn't break, it just acted and responded due to a lie it was given. In short, your secure computer program is only as safe as the outside info you feed or give it. HERE'S A RESEARCHED WAY I FOUND THAT EXPOSED HOW HACKERS TRICK SMART CONTRACTS👇 The first method often comes through Market manipulations, and then flash loan attacks, and latency exploits regularly breach systems without ever violating the underlying smart contract code. Relying on simple price averages or isolated validator nodes leaves billions exposed to subtle, economic-level attacks. WHAT COULD BE A SOLUTION TO STOP THE EXPLOITS? After trading with certain DEXs across Solana, Ton, Aptos and Injective, ive realized that most of these DEXs have improved their security systems in solving off-chain vulnerability which requires moving past simple data delivery toward cryptographic proofs, multi-source verification, and low-latency validation systems that can survive targeted market manipulation. A typicall example is STONfi which is built on GRAM(prev. TON). So if for any reason you happen to trade on TON, be rest assured that your assets and their solution is safe, audited and smooth. @ston_fi

🚨THE LIMITATIONS OF YIELD TOKENIZATION •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• I always felt like the aspect of splitting yield-bearing assets into principal and yield tokens was a massive step forward for fixed-income trading in decentralized markets. Because on paper, it allows investors hedge rates, speculate on future yield, and build structured financial products without intermediaries. But In practice, i just realized that these markets run into harsh liquidity scenarios which makes me wonder ''WHY'' in a way. LOOKING AT IT FROM A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE After looking at these things from a different perspective, ive realized that yield tokenization relies on thin market depth and continuous, predictable yield streams to function cleanly. And as such, when underlying protocols alter reward schedules or interest rates swing wildly, the secondary market for yield tokens becomes deeply illiquid. Navigating these structural boundaries requires moving away from pure leverage speculation toward sustainable, real-yield mechanics that survive changing macroeconomic cycles. WHERE IS BEST FOR YIELD ACTIVITIES? STONfi, a decentralized exchange built on GRAM[formerly called TON] offers the one of the best yield generating pools with deeper pools and little to no slippage trading experience accompanied with TON's cheap transactional fees. Got any take on this Topic? lets know in the comments👇 $GRAM

🚨THE LIMITATIONS OF YIELD TOKENIZATION •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• I always felt like the aspect of splitting yield-bearing assets into principal and yield tokens was a massive step forward for fixed-income trading in decentralized markets. Because on paper, it allows investors hedge rates, speculate on future yield, and build structured financial products without intermediaries. But In practice, i just realized that these markets run into harsh liquidity scenarios which makes me wonder ''WHY'' in a way. LOOKING AT IT FROM A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE After looking at these things from a different perspective, ive realized that yield tokenization relies on thin market depth and continuous, predictable yield streams to function cleanly. And as such, when underlying protocols alter reward schedules or interest rates swing wildly, the secondary market for yield tokens becomes deeply illiquid. Navigating these structural boundaries requires moving away from pure leverage speculation toward sustainable, real-yield mechanics that survive changing macroeconomic cycles. WHERE IS BEST FOR YIELD ACTIVITIES? STONfi, a decentralized exchange built on GRAM[formerly called TON] offeres the one of the best yield generating pools with deeper pools and little to no slippage trading experince accompanied with TON's cheap transactional fees. Got any take on this Topic? lets know in the comments👇 $GRAM

🚨Will AI Execution Become a Good Dex Feature? ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• I personally think that manual portfolio management, manual yield farming, and basic automated compounders are quickly becoming relics. Autonomous AI agents are stepping in as the native execution layer for decentralized platforms, executing high-frequency arbitrage, dynamic risk management, and rebalancing far faster than human operators can react. Imagine a scenario where you can converese with a Dex protocol AI to carry out a certain actions or activitieswhile youre away for your trading or portfolio expectation in the near future, Now thats the idea of what AI should be in DeFi products. So basically, i feel like this transformation might be introducing a fundamental shift in how applications are designed. Interfaces are no longer built solely for humans navigating Web3 wallets, but for software agents interpreting on-chain state via machine-readable endpoints. While this shift brings unprecedented efficiency, it might bring novel systemic threats to DEXs too such as algorithmic cascade failures, front-running agent strategies, and unmonitored automated risks executing at scale. Do you think an integration like this will be and upgrade to DeFi DEXs? Lets know in the comments👇 $GRAM @ston_fi

Eliminating Slippage with Dark Pool AMMs ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Public memory pools and transparent order books make large institutional trades virtually impossible to execute cleanly on-chain. Traditional Automated Market Makers (AMMs) expose order flow to every observer, opening large trades up to front-running, sandwich attacks, and massive slippage caused by Maximum Extractable Value (MEV) bots. Dark pool AMMs use zero-knowledge proofs and confidential computing to hide order parameters until execution, which restores privacy to trade routing. By obscuring trade sizes and execution points, these platforms offer the discretion institutional capital requires. Bringing hidden order execution on-chain fundamentally alters market dynamics, protecting large capital allocations without surrendering trustless validation. @ston_fi $GRAM

COMMON RISKS IN DEfi CROSS-CHAIN

Moving crypto across blockchains most times often feels very unsafe in a way. We route capital across chains to catch the best yield, but traditional bridge architecture forces users to carry severe, hidden risks which most people might not understand in a way. i'll explain what some of these traditional bridges actually affects traders👇

[•] FOUR LAYERS OF GAS - bridge protocol fees, destination gas, and arrival slippage.

[•] THEYRE MASSIVE TARGETS - Bridges hold huge amounts of locked, idle collateral in single contracts. It is no wonder bridge exploits accounted for over 69% of stolen crypto funds in 2022 ($2B+ lost) alongside massive validator compromises like Ronin ($625M) and Orbit Chain ($81M).

[•] WRAPPED TOKEN DEPENDENCY You do not receive native assets on arrival, what we often get is an IOU. If the underlying bridge fails or suffers a message-validation exploit (like the $292M Kelp DAO exploit), your wrapped token loses its peg instantly
. this makes the system vulnerable and in need of a better architecture.

HERE's A SOLUTION AT HAND STONfi addresses this with Omniston, a cross-chain execution layer that eliminates shared bridge vaults entirely by simply pairing Hashed Timelock Contracts (HTLCs) with a competitive market of professional resolvers. HOW DOES THIS MAKE CROSS-CHAIN TRADING BETTER? [1] This upgrade eliminates Zero centralized collateral pools for hackers to target like honeypots.

[2] Users recieve 100% native assets which means you receive the real destination token directly and not a wrapped IOU.

[3] Cross-chain users experience and use only guaranteed quotes, meaning that the price you sign at confirmation is the exact execution price of your trade.

[4] Users are protected by the Fail-safe logic. this means that your swaps settle atomically which makes both parties receive their quoted assets, or funds automatically return via timelock. $GRAM @ston_fi

UNDERSTANDING HOW STONfi CROSS-CHAIN WORKS Most traders think there's one way to get liquidity from Ethereum, BNB Chain or Base into TON. There isn't. There are two, and they leave you holding completely different things, let me explain👇 [•] Route 1 The bridge way: Your asset gets locked on the chain you're leaving, and TON mints you a wrapped copy called a Jetton. It works. But now you're holding a wrapped version of something, not the real thing, and you're trusting a bridge contract to stay solvent the whole time. [•] Route 2 The atomic swap way: This process is done through STONfi's Omniston. picture a scenario where you have a certain amount of asset on Ethereum but in need of that amount on TON and a network of resolvers races to fill your order. Two Hashed Timelock Contracts lock in on both sides at once, sharing one cryptographic key. When it unlocks, both sides settle. Nobody can walk away with your funds and leave you with nothing. Either you both get paid, or the timelock refunds whoever got left waiting. WHY DOES THIS EVEN MATTER? Because TON fees are cheap compared to Ethereum mainnet. If you're the type who rebalances often, that one-time cross-chain move pays for itself fast. every other swap after that costs almost nothing. Some TON-native tokens don't exist anywhere else. No bridge, no wrap, no workaround which leaves you with atomic swap being the only modeof getting your asset into TON from another network. And once you're in, It's the same AMM logic you already know. Pools, trades, LP fees (0.3% swap fee, LPs keep 0.2%), farming pools etc. Nothing exotic, theyve Just made it cheaper to actually use. So, The real question isn't "how do I move my asset across chains." It's "what do I actually want sitting in my wallet if i'll be using a specific chain." OMNISTON is live for Ethereum, BNB Chain, Base and Polygon right now on @ston_fi $GRAM $BNB Try it out here https://app.ston.fi/swap?mode=cross-chain&in=ton%3AUSD%E2%82%AE

ATF TOKEN TRADE OUTLOOK📈 ATF is also another token to be considered as the next big token with high probabality of giving the next 4-5X if baught at the right demand level. Heres what i'm basically looking at with respect to price action on ATF token👇 with the amount of strong rejctions we are having at that price level, i strongly think that the next probable zone for a high demand of ATF will be at the 6M marketcap price level which is a very valid point of interest as seen in the image below. And about where you can purchase the ATF token, @ston_fi should be your GO-TO trading platform on TON because of the little to no slippage and TON's cheap transaction fees they offer. Will you be buying ATF at that marketcap? Heres a link to set your orders at that marketcap https://app.ston.fi/swap?chartVisible=false&ft=GRAM&tt=EQANcW45W0Tp91bzvHayaPO6-6hf1Lm4XlWZ4rN6L5ofPWdb 🚨Remeber to always DYOR as this isn't a FA $GRAM

GROYP MARKET UPDATE 📈 I recently looked up some tokens with low marketcap on Gram at the moment and found about 3 of them and groyp happens to be part of the 3 tokens i'll be dropping insights on. So here's basically what i'm looking at the moment👇 GROYP made an all time high of about $3.77M marketcap and is currently consolidating heavily around that price level of 0.06244. WHAT SHOULD YOU EXPECT FROM THAT PRICE LEVEL? I strongly believe that with how price has been consolidating for a while now that we might be seeing the token heading lower to a price level where theyll be a more strong demand for GROYP around 0.0336 before the next pump to the upside. But the most important aspect of joining GROYP in it next demand level is knowing where to purchase GROYP at the best price possible without slippage and high fees. I'd recommend you set your limit on that level with a reliable dex on TON @ston_fi get ready to full your GROYP bags here https://app.ston.fi/swap?chartVisible=false&ft=GRAM&tt=EQAtwo6qMNwtr0iTA9eKVZ32cuACFJ0VKd78GrBWOe83-X1P Let me know if you'll be fulling your bags with GROYP in the comments👇 $GRAM @ston_fi

TON CROSS-CHAIN ROUTE IS LIVE If you've been following the conventional way of moving USDT from TRON to TON, it simply means you follow these paths👇 Initiating the transfer on a CEX → awaiting confirmations → confirming the withdrawal with a certain amount of fees before your crypto arrives in your wallet. These are basically multiple steps and processes but not seen as very efficient due to how the crypto space is constantly evolving. so in essence, whats better? HERE'S WHAT BETTER AT THE MOMENT💭 STONfi's Omniston layer skips all of that by utilizing linked Hashed Timelock Contracts (HTLC) on both chains where your asset locks on the source chain while a resolver locks the matching asset on the destination chain with both sharing one cryptographic key. Such that in the bigger picture of things, its either your swap completes on both sides, or it reverts and you get your funds back. The STONfi team has confidently assured that most of these cross-chain swaps settle in 15–40 seconds which is quite fast. TON↔EVM (Ethereum, Base, BNB, Polygon) is live in the dApp now WHAT MAKES THIS BETTER? - It's very self-custodial from start to finish - They're no wrapped-asset bridge risk - Saves you the long CEX withdrawal processes Check it out here 🔗https://app.ston.fi/swap?mode=cross-chain Note: DYOR and verify chain support in-app before swapping. @ston_fi $GRAM

🚨The reason Why some new TON users quit
I feel like alot of new crypto TON users face this same problem all the time, where they get to be gifted or airdropped USDt or earn a mini-app reward but can’t swap it because they don't have any gas in their wallet to cover transaction cost, So they get stuck at that point. HERE'S A GOOD NEWS FOR YOU GUYS
STONfi solved this with an update to their recent Omniston SDK where traders get to trade their assets and pay for gas off the available asset holdings in their wallet. Read more about it here https://blog.ston.fi/omnistons-new-execution-model-gasless-scenarios/ $GRAM @ston_fi