CryptoLinus

This whale just bought $67,000,000 worth of $ETH

Smart. They keep loading up.

$BTC Everyone is talking about the Monthly FVG now and how we’ve rejected there every single time we’ve tapped into it throughout this bear market.

But the hard truth is: It’s not going to give us a rejection this time.

I shorted the entire bear market using that exact same concept. I spilled the sauce when it was hot and barely anyone was paying attention to it. That single setup helped me catch 5 high-RR shorts on the way down.

Now I’m not taking another short just because the same setup is showing up again.

Why?

Because once a pattern becomes obvious and everyone starts positioning around the same idea, the market has a way of exploiting that consensus.

The edge was in identifying it before everyone else did. Now that it’s obvious, the positioning has to change.

Just look at the structure.

When have we ever seen this strong of a bullish impulse into a Monthly FVG throughout this bear market?

Short answer: We never did.

The market is changing, whether you like it or not.

You can either adapt and profit from this transition, or stay fixated on “what you think should happen” and keep becoming liquidity.

Citadel made me think about identity on Dusk in a slightly different way.
I used to associate compliance with having to reveal more information, but selective disclosure points in the opposite direction. An investor could prove something like residency or accreditation without automatically exposing their entire identity to the application.
That sounds like a small difference until you put it inside a regulated market.
If a security has eligibility requirements, the platform needs to know whether the investor qualifies. It does not necessarily need their full personal history, address, or every other piece of information attached to their identity.
That is where I think Citadel becomes useful. The proof and the underlying information do not have to be treated as the same thing.
I hope the Dusk devs keep pushing this further and make it easier for applications to use these proofs without developers having to build complicated identity systems from scratch.
The part I would like to see is how far this can go when different financial products have different eligibility rules.
Would you rather prove only what the market needs to know, or give the platform your full identity every time?
@Dusk $DUSK #dusk

A strange thing happened on a Binance P2P order that looked completely normal at first.
The buyer had a verified profile, a solid trading history, and the payment arrived exactly as expected. Nothing about the transaction suspicious.
Then, after the payment was received, the buyer asked for a refund to a different account because they had “sent from the wrong one.”
That changed everything. The money was already in my account, but sending it back manually would create a second transfer that was no longer tied cleanly to the original P2P order. I didn't want to create a new problem while trying to solve the first one.
The order stayed untouched while I kept the payment proof and chat history and used the official Appeal process.
That experience made one distinction much clearer to me:
Receiving the correct money does not mean every follow-up request is safe to accept.
Before completing a P2P trade, I check the counterparty and the payment details. During the order, I keep communication on Binance. If someone suddenly wants a refund, a new account, or a different arrangement, I don't improvise.
A clean transaction should end with the same trail it started with.
@Binance Vietnam #BinanceP2PAnToan

Bitcoin has completely flipped its 4H market structure after a powerful move from the $63K support zone into major resistance.

BTC is currently sitting around $68,018 after testing the $70.5K area and pulling back to consolidate.

The important part:

Bitcoin didn’t just bounce.

It reclaimed key levels that previously acted as resistance:

$64K
$65.7K
$67.2K

That changes the structure.

The market has moved from a lower-high consolidation phase into a potential expansion phase.

Now the level everyone is watching:

$70.5K.

A clean reclaim and hold above this area opens the path toward:

$71.5K

$72K

The main thing I’m watching now is whether buyers can defend the breakout.

$67.2K is the key level.

As long as Bitcoin continues holding above that zone, dips are likely to be viewed as healthy consolidation rather than a breakdown.

The breakout happened.

Now we wait to see if Bitcoin can turn resistance into support and continue the next leg higher.

A hacker is buying $ETH as the price rises!

As the market rallied, an unknown hacker spent $38.53M to buy 18,272 $ETH at an average price of $2,109.

Bitcoin hit 69k - finally starting to fill the gap.

Real challenge will be 72k area.

Aaaand quick reminder: weekly trend is down until we see a higher high above 82k...Bitcoin hit 69k - finally starting to fill the gap.

Real challenge will be 72k area.

Aaaand quick reminder: weekly trend is down until we see a higher high above 82k...

The $BTC CVD indicator shows buying by whales.

Retail investors sold during the short-term decline. However, buying by whales continues to maintain an increase trend.

There are still no large-scale sell or buy walls. Furthermore, large-scale selling by whales has not been confirmed.

The positive trend is continuing.

The Dusk node requirements surprised me a little because they are much lighter than I expected for a network targeting regulated financial infrastructure.
A provisioner can run with 2 CPU cores, 4 GB RAM, 50 GB storage and a 10 Mbps connection. The minimum stake is 1,000 DUSK, and the node needs to stay online and synchronized to participate in consensus.
I actually like this detail because people usually talk about Dusk through privacy, RWAs and compliance, but none of that matters much if running the underlying network requires some massive infrastructure setup.
There is also a separate prover role, which makes sense when the network is dealing with zero knowledge workloads instead of putting every kind of computation onto the same machine.
So the architecture feels a little more practical to me now. A relatively modest provisioner handles consensus participation, while heavier proving work can be separated when needed.
That is a very different thing from simply saying Dusk is built for financial markets.
I’m more curious about how this separation performs once confidential financial applications start generating real proving demand.
@Dusk $DUSK #dusk

A Binance P2P Order Came With One Extra Instruction
A USDT sell order was already active when the buyer added one more request in the chat: use a different payment note than the one normally associated with the transaction.
The amount was unchanged. The bank account was unchanged. Only the payment reference was different.
That small change matters because a clean P2P transaction should be easy to connect from the buyer, the order, the payment and the chat. Adding an unrelated reference makes that trail harder to understand if the transaction later needs to be reviewed.
The safer move is simple: follow the payment details shown in the active Binance P2P order. Keep the transaction inside the platform, check the counterparty information, and retain the Order ID and payment record.
So I told the buyer to follow the original order instructions. The trade stayed inside Binance P2P, where the escrow, order chat and Appeal process could still be used if anything went wrong.
A small payment-reference change might look harmless, but I would never trade a clean transaction trail for convenience.
Before paying or accepting payment, I now check the order details, payment instructions, counterparty identity and transaction record against each other. If someone suddenly wants a different arrangement, I stop and clarify it through the order.
@Binance Vietnam #BinanceP2PAnToan

Bitcoin pushed into the $65K resistance zone before seeing an immediate rejection.

Price wicked into $65,000 before pulling back to around $64,300.

The important part:

Bulls are still defending the $64K area.

$64K has now flipped into the key short-term support level.

As long as BTC holds above this zone, the rejection looks more like consolidation rather than a breakdown.

The levels I’m watching:

Above $65K:

$65.7K
$67.2K

Below $64K:

$63K
$61K

Bitcoin is currently stuck between a key pivot and major resistance.

A clean reclaim of $65.7K would shift momentum back in favour of the bulls.

Until then, patience.

Confirmation over prediction.

$BTC At the moment, it looks like we're seeing a rejection off the strong OB, which we predicted yesterday...

Still a bit early to fully understand the price movement, but if we see a continuation lower, the next region I'm expecting to test is the imbalance formed around $63.7k.

I'll assess price action based on whether we accept or reject this region.

I'm currently in a short from $64.8k with an expectation of reclaiming $63.3k.

At first i thought native issuance was basically just another version of tokenization but the more i read about how Dusk separates the two, the more i started to see why they keep making that distinction. Tokenization can put an existing asset onchain, while native issuance can change where the asset lifecycle actually starts and how ownership, transfers and settlement are handled from there.

That also made the regulated securities angle make more sense to me. If the asset is designed around an onchain lifecycle instead of being created somewhere else and represented onchain later, then the blockchain is not just acting like a new place to store the same asset.
I think that is where the idea gets more interesting. Creating a token is probably the easy part. Making issuance, ownership, transfer and settlement work together while the asset still has to fit real regulatory requirements is the much harder problem.

The part i keep coming back to is that $DUSK is trying to handle more than the token itself. If the entire lifecycle can eventually happen around the same infrastructure, then tokenization becomes only one small part of the story.
Would native issuance eventually matter more than simply putting existing assets onchain?

@Dusk $DUSK #dusk

CZ officially stops using his public wallet, saying it’s “almost impossible to clean out” as unsolicited meme coins continue piling in.

Multiple traders had been monitoring CZ’s wallet for trading signals, with one reportedly making $282K, a 29x return, after spotting the wallet burn $MarsCoin and immediately buying in while paying 100x the usual gas fees.

The founder of Binance says he will donate the remaining tokens to Giggle Academy before abandoning the address, as attempts to burn unsolicited tokens only resulted in more token spam and further speculation around his on-chain activity.

$BTC EQHs are finally swept and now price is chopping around it,

I am expecting price to pump to 64.8k-65k and that's where I will look for short setups.

Expecting price to start dumping from the other half of the week (Thursday).

On HTF, I am still targeting the 60-61k before the bull run starts.

I once had a P2P order where the countdown became more stressful than the trade itself.
I was buying USDT and noticed the payment window was getting shorter. My bank was taking longer than usual, and I started thinking about the timer instead of the transaction.
That was when I nearly made a stupid decision.
I was about to transfer first and deal with the details afterward simply because I didn't want the order to expire.
I stopped and looked at the order again. The payment window is there to define how long I have to complete the payment, not to force me into sending money blindly. Binance also tells users to review the advertiser's terms before placing the order.
⏳ I would rather lose one P2P offer than rush a payment just because the countdown is running.
🏦 If my bank is delayed or unavailable, I wait until I can complete the payment properly instead of improvising with another account or another method.
📍 I only follow the payment method and conditions shown in that specific advertisement.
🧾 If the order expires before I can complete everything correctly, I move on rather than trying to recreate the transaction through a different route.
The annoying part is that the pressure came entirely from my own head.
That made me realize how easily a countdown can turn a normal P2P transaction into an emotional decision.
A rushed bank transfer can create a problem that doesn't disappear when the timer does.
@Binance Vietnam #BinanceP2PAnToan

I was lat how Dusk handles smart contracts and one thing caught me off guard, the network is not trying to make every developer follow the same execution model. There is native WASM execution through Piecrust, while @Dusk also gives Solidity developers another route through DuskEVM.
A financial application does not always have the same requirements as a normal DeFi app. Some developers may want the control of the native environment, while others already have years of Solidity code and tooling they would rather not throw away. Dusk seems to be leaving both doors open instead of forcing everything through one stack.
The part I find harder to judge is whether that flexibility actually helps adoption or just creates another decision developers have to make before building. More options are useful, but only if developers clearly understand when each environment makes sense.
That probably matters more than simply having an EVM layer. A chain can make development familiar and still struggle to attract applications that people actually use.
Would you rather build directly with Piecrust, or take the easier route through Solidity and DuskEVM?
$DUSK #dusk @Dusk

I was buying USDT on Binance P2P and made a stupid mistake I almost turned into a much bigger headache.

My bank app froze right after I confirmed the transfer. I thought the payment had failed, so I pressed the button again. A few seconds later, both transfers appeared in my bank history.

Now I had paid twice, while the seller only had one Binance P2P order to match against those payments. I immediately realized that sending the second payment created a problem that escrow could not magically solve for me.

🧩 I kept everything inside the original order instead of asking the seller to handle the extra money somewhere else.

📌 I saved both bank receipts, the Order ID and the chat because the second transfer was not part of the original order amount.

🚧 I also refused any quick “just send it back to another account” solution. If money needs to be returned, I want the transaction and refund trail to remain clear.

The painful part was realizing that a mistake can happen before any scam is involved. One extra transfer can create a separate payment dispute, waste time and require evidence to explain exactly what happened.

That changed one habit for me: when a banking app looks delayed, I check the transaction history before pressing Send again.
One order. One payment. Check first, send once.

@Binance Vietnam #BinanceP2PAnToan