超人不会飞2020

Today I’m outside doing campfire cooking in a tent, so I can’t livestream. Let’s do another round of joining the group chat to co-invest in the $BTC activity. As before, enter the “Superman’s Babies” group chat, predict the price of $BTC , and the Little Predictor will get a reward. The rules will be sent in the group chat.

🫶 If you haven’t been tied to an invitation code on Binance, come take a look!
点击查询是否符合条件

🫶 Click, and if it doesn’t redirect, copy the link and open it in your browser
😘 If you meet the requirements, you can fill in my invitation code: SSSYYY
😘 After binding, remember to generate a trading volume of $150,000 within 30 days
If you have any questions, you can join the chat room and add me for consultation ⬇️

Human Salted Egg Yolk🌇

Superman 100U fixed investment day 8 of $BTC ✅

After the market surged, the voices around us becoming more bullish have grown louder.
The hotter it gets, the more we must stick to our own rhythm.
I continue to invest according to the plan every day, without being swept up by market sentiment, and I firmly refuse to chase highs by adding more.

Investment isn’t about who makes the biggest gains in the short term, but about discipline and mindset.

⚠️Personal live-trading records only; not investment advice
#定投 #比特币创2023年3月来最佳周表现

#dusk $DUSK @Dusk Last night I pulled out and reread the white paper for @Dusk again, and only then realized I’d been understanding it a bit wrong before.

To be honest, whenever people talk about $DUSK , they always gravitate toward a privacy blockchain. But now I think its real winning hand is the “privacy + compliance + settlement” combo tightly put together. It’s essentially designed for financial services from the ground up—there’s an XSC standard to run confidential smart contracts. Privacy isn’t a patch added afterward; it’s embedded at the base layer. Institutions want transactions to be legitimate, but they don’t want to expose sensitive information like positions, counterparties, and balances. That positioning really hits the pain points of traditional finance.

That said, the confirmed issuance supposedly over €300 million, with regulated exchanges putting in €200 million and more than 20,000 real accounts—sounds pretty impressive. But I’m used to breaking it down. Of the four parts—asset subscription, contract deployment, wallet distribution, and real turnover—only the first one is visible. The other three are basically blank in public details. Signing intent is still far from code being deployed on-chain. The tokens are minted, but they haven’t entered private-key wallets or produced real interactions, so it can’t be considered truly live. Chainlink price feeds, Cordial custody, and the Quantoz stablecoin channel are all in place, but modules like Dusk Trade, DuskEVM, and Hedger are still sitting in the testing stage. A few hundred million needs to be stuffed from a deck of slides into wallets, and the pipelines aren’t fully connected yet.

Technically, don’t get fooled by that 2.8 ms on-chain verification either. PLONK does push verification to the edge—proof size is fixed. But when running the Citadel identity circuits locally, one license is over 30,000 constraints; the prover needs to chew through it for more than ten seconds, while the verifier takes only a fraction of a second. The ZK computation overhead is roughly 10,000 times the original computation. On-chain it’s smooth; the burden is pushed to off-chain devices, and the node barrier is raised quite a bit. Even selective disclosure for KYC still requires off-chain regulatory entities to stamp it, which feels a bit awkward compared to a purely trustless setup.

So, when I ask whether it works, I’m watching just one metric: the real conversion rate. Use on-chain, tangible transactions to squeeze the “water” out of subscriptions. Only when the ledger is fully transparent—publishing contract addresses, on-chain timestamps, net balances, independent addresses, and the latest transfers—can the €300 million be considered solid tradable capital. #dusk

August 22nd, Binance Alpha 30-day New Token Trading Competition

🚀🚀Follow on-chain market trends and participate with #ALPHA . Whether you’re just “scratching” or “chasing,” you can trade directly using your Binance Web3 wallet. Use the super invite code SSSYYY to automatically get 30% off. If you don’t know how, you can follow Figures 2 and 3, or join the group chat to exchange ideas and learn together.

1️⃣GRVT, the contract is still active, with a countdown of 7 days. Current price is 0.2815, up more than 2% in the past 24 hours. Trading volume is just over 640,000, and the FDV is almost reaching 280 million. The day’s limit order totaled over 30 million, and the previous day’s volume was nearly 1 billion.

2️⃣DOS, the contract has 18 days left, and the trading contest has 5 days remaining. Price is 0.2531, surged by 9% directly in the past 24 hours. Trading volume is over 12 million, and the FDV is around 250 million. The day’s limit order is about 1.5 million, while the previous day was close to 200 million.

3️⃣KII, 22 days left, and the contest has 4 days remaining. Current price is 0.0668, up by about 3%. Trading volume is over 66 million, and the FDV is 120 million. The day’s limit order is 740,000, and the previous day was over 150 million.

4️⃣Bulls Come (牛来), 26 days left. Price is 0.0633; in the past 24 hours it directly soared by 10.5%. Trading volume is 29 million, and the FDV is just over 60 million. The day’s limit order is 400,000, and the previous day was 6.5 million.

5️⃣AEON, only 4 days left. Price is 0.0707; it fell back by 4% today. Trading volume is 47 million, and the FDV is around 70 million. The day’s limit order is over 30,000, and the previous day was 900,000.

6️⃣MarsCoin, 7 days left. Current price is 0.0309, up by nearly 11%. Trading volume is 10 million, and the FDV is 30 million. The day’s limit order is just over 10,000, and the previous day was 1.8 million.

7️⃣QUID, 12 days left. Price is 0.0726, up by 6%. Trading volume is just over 1 million, and the FDV is 70 million. The day’s limit order is 198, and the previous day was 70,000.

8.22 Morning Market Quick Report 📝

Overnight, the overall market sentiment warmed up. The U.S. stock market finally ended its prior streak of consecutive declines, and all three major indexes closed higher.

🚀On the U.S. side, the performance is still clearly divergent.
The broader market improved, but tech leaders were mixed—Tesla surged, while Nvidia and Apple saw slight pullbacks.
Crypto-related stocks directly took off. HOOD and COIN posted impressive gains. The storage sector $SNDK saw mild consolidation—up at high levels, it continues to grind back and forth, and friends who chased the top earlier still feel uncomfortable.

🚀This week in the crypto space has been absolutely ruthless. BTC surged all the way up, briefly touching around 78,000. ETH also climbed and held above 2,500, with an extremely aggressive week-over-week gain.

Expectations driven by Treasury repo buybacks, a chain reaction of short liquidations, and continuous inflows into spot ETFs—all these combined forces pushed the行情 higher and higher.

But the higher it climbs, the more we need to stay clear-headed. This move is basically a lift driven by both emotion and capital.
The zone above 79,500–80,000 is a strong psychological level and a supply/overhead pressure area. Without strong volume holding it in place, a sharp pullback is easy to trigger;
Below, the key support to watch is 73,000. If this holds, the upward structure in the short term won’t get damaged.

The more狂热 the market becomes, the less suitable it is to blindly chase higher. I still stick to my daily 100U DCA—won’t casually increase position size to gamble on new highs.

Friends, let’s chat—do you think this week can reach the 80,000 level, or will we see a pullback and shakeout right away?

⚠️Personal market commentary only; not investment advice
#BTC #美股

Friends' $SPCX are also out of trouble 😅 I’m not holding this one anymore either; I should have run 🏃‍♀️ earlier. Sold it and switched to $AAOI

$CRCL Didn't achieve unity of knowing and doing. When it fell below $60, I didn't add more. Buying CRCL was the right decision, but the mistake was not buying enough at that move

Superman 100U DCA Day 7 of $BTC ✅

The longer you do DCA, the more you can feel the emotional tug-of-war the market brings.

I sincerely hope everyone can have a little less trading anxiety.

Everyone has their own difficulties, and everyone’s circumstances are different.

In the end, the most important thing in life is to live as the version of yourself that belongs to you.

Choose a rhythm and lifestyle that suit you—there is no absolute right or wrong, and there’s no such thing as winning or losing in some universal sense.

You don’t have to obsess over other people’s returns to compare yourself; other people’s scripts may not fit you.

You don’t need to chase everyone else’s idea of success. I only hope that today’s you is one step further than yesterday’s you, and closer to your true self.

When the market rises and falls, just hold on to your own pace. I will continue to坚持（sic） doing 100U daily in batches for DCA.

⚠️Sharing only personal live trading and insights, not investment advice
#BTC #DCA

#dusk $DUSK @Dusk Yesterday I was flipping through an album and saw the Dusk staking poster I had screen-capped back then. At the time, what I thought about was saving coins to earn interest—then I only later realized: I had treated Provisioner like a balance-based wealth management product. That’s not what it is.

First, the threshold: it starts at a minimum of 1000 DUSK, and you also have to run the full synchronization node yourself—you can’t just toss it in and be done. The staking process spans two epochs; after you complete 4320 blocks of maturity, assuming 10-second block times, you have to wait roughly 12 hours before you’re eligible for consensus. The reward algorithm is even more complex: it’s not issued linearly based on principal. Instead, it’s determined by the block you produce, your votes, and the probability of being selected among all effective staked positions worldwide—all three layers stacked together to decide how much you can earn in that round. Sixty? No—block rewards: 70% to the block producer, certificate trust gets split out, and transaction fees roll into the block. In essence, it’s work-probability × correct-match probability × emission curve—not the static “APY” shown on a dashboard.

The penalties are interesting too. The soft penalty doesn’t burn your principal; it only takes 10% of your active staked amount and returns it to the reward pool. If you’re penalized for several epochs in a row, you lose eligibility until you produce blocks and cast votes normally, at which point it resets. The hard penalty cuts deeper: invalid blocks burn 10%, and double-voting or double-producing blocks burns 20%. If your machine goes offline, it’s not an immediate death sentence—but if you act maliciously, you get carved out. In PoS terms, this level is somewhere in the middle-to-high range; at least it doesn’t treat stakers like LP livestock. But don’t let it fool you into thinking decentralization is guaranteed and steady. With 1000 DUSK plus a VPS, static IP, and key isolation, it naturally filters out most retail participants. Roughly 37% of the supply is staked, and there are around a couple hundred block-producing nodes—this only shows that the security budget is sufficient, not that the geography is well-distributed or that it’s resilient to Sybil attacks.

Now look at RWA: if you break it into four steps—issuance, trading, disclosure, and settlement—many projects only do the first two. What institutions really get stuck on is whether this chain can simultaneously handle confidentiality, provide auditability, and ensure irreversible settlement. Dusk uses zero-knowledge proofs for verifiable confidentiality: you don’t have to publish the raw transaction history; you can still prove that the rules are being executed. When an audit is needed, disclosures can be selectively made. That’s closer to the real market than either full transparency or “hide everything.”

The real limit is still the bridgehead—it matters more than total supply itself.

For now, I’m just watching how the maturity mechanism and post-mainnet penalty-and-slashing events play out. I haven’t gone all-in. Old-timer caution isn’t because I don’t trust it—it’s because I know the responsibility mechanism also needs time to run and produce enough sample data. @Dusk $DUSK #dusk

What’s your attitude toward Dusk?

I have something to do today, livestream at 4:00 PM ❤️❤️

#termmax @TermMax Last night I went through the @TermMax borrowing flow and the V2 vault again in detail, and found a few points that are easy to misunderstand. Once you untangle them, it’s actually quite interesting.

The first easy-to-misunderstand part is MLTV. It constrains the debt ceiling, not direct lending of 80% of the collateral value. Lock 2 ETH, MLTV 80%, and you can borrow up to 1600. But in the actual operation, that 1600 FT was split into 1530 principal and 70 interest. The interest portion is exchanged into XT and then recombined for redemption—so the wallet ultimately receives only 1530. 70 ÷ 1530 = 4.58%. That’s the real cost of your funds. GT may remember the debt as 1600, but that number includes the upfront interest, so you can’t just do your math off that figure.

Second, TermMax solves a real operational pain point. Previously, on Aave, for a looping borrow, you borrow USDC to buy assets and then deposit them back. Gas and slippage eat up a lot of the profit, and if any step fails mid-way, the whole loop gets stuck. TermMax completes borrowing, swapping, and re-collateralization inside a single contract—saving several steps. Basis arbitrage becomes clearer too: you might find a stable opportunity with 12% annualized, but a floating-rate protocol could spike from 4% to 15%—and the rate spread disappears instantly. TermMax can lock your borrowing cost, say at 6%, so the net spread can be calculated and “locked in” ahead of time. Large holders who don’t want to sell ETH or BTC, but still want liquidity to participate in other opportunities: entering with a fixed rate locks in the cost, so the safety margin is relatively higher.

Third is V2’s capital efficiency design. Unmatched capital is first deployed into the floating-yield layer. For example, deposit 800 USDC to buy FT, but only 500 gets matched; the remaining 300 is deployed to earn automatically per the curator’s configuration. The weighted APY is around 4.5%, and those returns are distributed to FT holders. This layer isn’t huge, but it’s better than idle capital.

In short, TermMax is more like an on-chain fixed-income infrastructure, serving large capital and arbitrage needs—it’s not a tool you use to go in and 2x. We’ll need to keep observing the liquidity depth of FT in the secondary market; selling mid-way may involve slippage. If the borrowing page could display the actual received amount, total GT debt, and maturity date side by side, it would be even clearer. This 1530/1600 set is just a mechanism example, not a real-time quote—ultimately you still need to calculate your liquidity and total debt yourself. #TermMax

What do you all think about TermMax?

August 21st, Binance Alpha 30-Day New Token Trading Competition

🚀🚀Keep an eye on on-chain market trends and participate in #ALPHA “snatch the fur and beat the dog”. You can trade directly using your Binance Web3 wallet. Use the superhuman invitation code SSSYYY to automatically save 30%. If you don’t know how, follow the instructions in Image 2 and Image 3, or join the group chat to exchange ideas and learn together.

✅Let’s take a look at today’s trading competition daily report:

1️⃣GRVT稳坐头把交椅, current price 0.2773, 24-hour trading volume 1.05 million U. Although it’s down by nearly 9%, FDV is about 277 million. Today’s limit orders成交 31 million, but the day before was 956 million!

2️⃣KII is second, 0.0651, 24-hour volume over 83 million, down by more than 7%. Yesterday’s limit orders were 272 million, but today it shrank to 1.6 million.

3️⃣DOS is third, 0.2321, volume 10.95 million, down by about 8%. Yesterday’s limit orders were 136 million, today only 1.48 million remains.

4️⃣“牛来” is quite wild today—despite the downturn, it surged 32.8%. Price is 0.0569, volume 28.61 million. Yesterday’s limit orders were 7 million, today just 120 thousand.

5️⃣MarsCoin is down nearly 11%, current price 0.0284, volume 8.46 million. Yesterday’s limit orders were 1.64 million, today only a bit over 30 thousand.

6️⃣AEON 0.0739, down 8.7%, volume 42.16 million. Yesterday it was 650k, today 18k.

7️⃣QUID 0.0686, down 4%, volume 680k. Limit orders are basically zero—today it’s only a little over 1,000.

🚀8.21 Morning Market Snapshot📝

It’s interesting how the overnight markets diverged: the US stock market as a whole weakened, but the crypto market showed an independent and stronger uptrend.

1️⃣ US Stocks
All three major indexes closed lower together, with tech giants generally pulling back.
What’s interesting is that sectors showed a split pattern: as the overall market slid downward, the memory/storage sector actually held up against the trend. $SNDK , Micron rose slightly; funds along the AI memory/storage theme have not completely exited yet.

2️⃣ Crypto
Early in the morning the rally continued to push higher. BTC held above 71,000, and ETH followed with strength.
The core catalyst for this upswing: the US Treasury yields were pushed lower as the buyback of longer-term debt expanded; the market is debating expectations of no rate hikes in September. On top of that, a large number of shorts were liquidated (squeezed out). Spot ETF inflows have also continued. Multiple forces together pushed the market upward.

3️⃣ But don’t let the big jump make you overexcited—this still looks like a rebound driven by sentiment.
The strong resistance zone is above 73,000–73,500. Without volume, it’s easy to spike up and then pull back.
For downside support, watch 68,500. As long as this level is held, the upward consolidation structure should remain intact.

4️⃣ The more heated the market gets, the more you shouldn’t chase wildly. I’ll keep following my daily 100U DCA and won’t arbitrarily increase position size to bet on a one-way move.

⚠️Personal market commentary only—does not constitute investment advice
#BTC #美股

Superman 100U DCA day 6 of $BTC ✅

Last night’s violent surge made the market suddenly lively; a lot of people’s emotions got stirred by the order book.
It’s true that the short-term has risen hard, but I still follow the plan and continue my DCA. In a sharp rally, I will not chase the price higher.

Don’t try to bet on an exact bottom or top—DCA is about discipline. The more irrational the market gets, the more you need to hold your own pace.

⚠️Personal account only; not investment advice
#BTC #DCA

#termmax @TermMax Last night I went through the document for @TermMax from start to finish again, and the more I read, the more interesting it feels. It’s not just slapping a “fixed interest rate” label on a page and calling it done—it breaks down the whole lending/borrowing process in quite a detailed way.

First, there’s that combo of FT, XT, and GT. FT is similar to zero-coupon bonds: at maturity, it can be redeemed for 1 debt token. XT is part of the pairing: 1 FT plus 1 XT equals 1 debt token. GT, meanwhile, fully records your collateral and debt positions. Once you break it down like this, debt stops being a black box—you can combine it and transfer it separately. “Fixed interest rate” isn’t just a number on a page; it actually runs through the token flow.

The order mechanism is also pretty practical. Range Orders and Limit Orders can use multiple intervals to stitch together a pricing curve. The lender sets a minimum acceptable interest rate, the borrower sets a maximum acceptable one, and the aggregator matches to find better execution prices. Users aren’t just passively accepting a single rate—they’re actively quoting. Interest rates stop being only an outcome and begin forming their own market price.

There’s also Physical Delivery. After the settlement window ends, if the loan hasn’t been fully repaid, FT holders can redeem proportionally to retrieve the underlying assets and collateral from the redemption pool. The biggest fear with fixed-term lending is when the market doesn’t go your way and you don’t know how to exit—this design feels like it’s already thought through the fallback plan.

Of course, I’m not completely swept up. For predictable returns, both sides need real demand, and liquidity has to keep up. If order depth isn’t enough, the so-called “market interest rate” may only be a surface-level price. Whether on-chain fixed-income can truly work still comes down to whether users actually buy it.

Next, I’ll be watching three things: whether different terms can produce a stable interest-rate curve; whether orders can generate sustained competition; and whether the FT price can show a clearly explainable spread versus floating-rate products. If all of that works, then TermMax would truly be approaching an on-chain interest-rate market—rather than just another fixed-rate lending product.#TermMax

Which aspect do you think TermMax is most likely to validate first?

#dusk $DUSK @Dusk Yesterday I chatted with my bestie, Shirley. She said I spend my days doing creator tasks like I’m just clocking in for work, and that I can only make a few U. I didn’t bother explaining. She’s more of a tech person—she looks at everything as an input-output ratio. But for me, every day I just mindlessly check rankings at set times and write project analyses. It’s like watching something grow slowly. Whether it can make the榜 (top ranking) or not, at least it gives these boring days a bit of hope.

Speaking of that $DUSK she’s watching—I’ve actually been keeping an eye on it too. The current price has been hovering around $0.07. The 24-hour low is $0.063, and it’s even touched $0.074. Its market cap is over $40 million. Honestly, it feels awkward: not high, not low—it’s hard to decide whether to buy or not. But you can’t judge by price alone. You’ve got to see what it’s doing.

First, the project’s positioning has changed. @Dusk stopped playing the pure privacy-coin game long ago. The official stance is clearly to move toward regulated financial markets—mainly focusing on RWA and digital securities, and they’re also pushing tokenization of small and medium-sized enterprises. On X, their team talks about private markets every day, and the direction is very clear. Development hasn’t stopped either: in August, DuskEVM optimized cross-layer asset transfers, and the DuskScan and Wallet Connection SDKs rolled out one after another. Everything really does look like it’s moving forward.

Second, the cross-chain mechanism is the part I’m most worried about. Web Wallet supports both public and private transfers, but when native assets go back to BSC, it uses a bridge account plus a semi-automatic Memo flow. If you enter anything wrong, it gets stuck and requires manual intervention. With low traffic, that’s manageable—but if we ever hit a bull market with high concurrency, can customer support handle it, and will settlement times get longer? That’s the operational bottleneck I need to verify.

Third—and this is the core—it addresses institutional pain points. Many financial institutions won’t use public chains. It’s not that assets can’t be tokenized; it’s that the trading trail is too transparent. If you build a bond position in batches, the addresses and timing change are all visible. The information itself becomes the cost. Dusk’s Phoenix uses shielded transactions and zero-knowledge proofs to hide the details, while viewing keys enable selective disclosure. Regulators can check it, auditors can collect evidence, and at the same time it reveals less business information. This “financial-grade privacy” positioning feels spot on.

My take is simple: what really needs proving isn’t just that privacy is stronger, but whether institutions are willing to pay the extra complexity cost for disclosing less information. Someday, if information leakage becomes a hard cost for RWA on-chain, competition will shift from “who can issue” to “who can make transactions verifiable without being overly transparent.” #dusk
Can DUSK make this logic work?