阿尔法灰
8k Publications
阿尔法灰
先人一步，做 Alpha 🔥 Join me on X @Alpha_Grey8
Ouvert au trading
Trade régulièrement
4 an(s)
772 Suivis
9.4K+ Abonnés
3.3K+ J’aime
Publications
Portefeuille
Tous
Citations
Direct
PINNED
Hello guys let's share some🎁🎁🫂 reward to grab the reward you just need to hit the like and comment button go go before it's too late 🎉🎉😻😻
$BMT $TMX $EDEN
#USIranReportedlyReachCeasefireConsensus
#HKJulyGoldNetExportsToMainland56.193Tons
#JapanNoAdditionalOilReserveReleaseInSepOct
#Binance
$BMT $TMX $EDEN
#USIranReportedlyReachCeasefireConsensus
#HKJulyGoldNetExportsToMainland56.193Tons
#JapanNoAdditionalOilReserveReleaseInSepOct
#Binance
Perfect long call for my sweet followers🎁🫂
Are you a long trade? if yes so this setup is especially for you don't miss this buddy...
buy EDEN at the price of 0.071 ✔️
and sell this at 0.073 and 0.075 and the last one Target should be new high..✔️
because $EDEN chart shows a clear buy trend by making higher highs and higher lows and we should target the next high the...
Stoploss will remain below the previous higher low area which accur at 0.06650🚫
Click here to huy $EDEN
#SOLJumps20%OnTheWeek
#BinanceSquare
#Write2Earn
#EDENUSDT
$HEMI
Are you a long trade? if yes so this setup is especially for you don't miss this buddy...
buy EDEN at the price of 0.071 ✔️
and sell this at 0.073 and 0.075 and the last one Target should be new high..✔️
because $EDEN chart shows a clear buy trend by making higher highs and higher lows and we should target the next high the...
Stoploss will remain below the previous higher low area which accur at 0.06650🚫
Click here to huy $EDEN
#SOLJumps20%OnTheWeek
#BinanceSquare
#Write2Earn
#EDENUSDT
$HEMI
CHIP $0.04461📈
Entry: 0.04461
TP: 0.04700 / 0.04900
SL: 0.04050
this one absolutely sent it from 0.03083 to 0.049 today 😳 pulled back a bit but still holding way above where it broke out, buyers clearly still in control... watching for it to hold here before it tries the highs again 🙏
$CHIP
Entry: 0.04461
TP: 0.04700 / 0.04900
SL: 0.04050
this one absolutely sent it from 0.03083 to 0.049 today 😳 pulled back a bit but still holding way above where it broke out, buyers clearly still in control... watching for it to hold here before it tries the highs again 🙏
$CHIP
HEMI $0.01164 — 15m Scalp 📈
Entry: 0.01164
TP: 0.01200 / 0.01230
SL: 0.01128
man this thing moved so fast today, from 0.0078 to 0.01247 in like no time 😳 pulled back after that but it's still sitting above where it broke out earlier, hasn't given that back yet which tells me buyers aren't done. kinda waiting to see if it holds this spot before i add more... if it does i think it tries for new highs again 🙏 not chasing it though, already ran hard once
$HEMI
Entry: 0.01164
TP: 0.01200 / 0.01230
SL: 0.01128
man this thing moved so fast today, from 0.0078 to 0.01247 in like no time 😳 pulled back after that but it's still sitting above where it broke out earlier, hasn't given that back yet which tells me buyers aren't done. kinda waiting to see if it holds this spot before i add more... if it does i think it tries for new highs again 🙏 not chasing it though, already ran hard once
$HEMI
ETH $2,494.84 — 15m Scalp 📈
Entry: 2495
TP: 2512 / 2522
SL: 2483
Watched this one dump hard into that 2477 low... and just as fast it turned around 👀 feels like the sellers ran out of gas down there. Sitting tight right around 2495 now... kinda calm before the next push. If it holds this zone I'm looking for a quick move back up toward 2512, maybe a bit further if it keeps the momentum 🙏 keeping my stop close since it's still a bit choppy here...
$ETH
Entry: 2495
TP: 2512 / 2522
SL: 2483
Watched this one dump hard into that 2477 low... and just as fast it turned around 👀 feels like the sellers ran out of gas down there. Sitting tight right around 2495 now... kinda calm before the next push. If it holds this zone I'm looking for a quick move back up toward 2512, maybe a bit further if it keeps the momentum 🙏 keeping my stop close since it's still a bit choppy here...
$ETH
Vérifié
docs.dusk.network's own core components page mentions "native bridging" as part of duskds, connecting duskevm and duskvm to the base layer. that's the third thing i've now found called a "bridge" in dusk's stack. i went and actually confirmed whether that's the same mechanism that got hit in january — and honestly i almost assumed it was, given how loosely "bridge" gets used everywhere — but it's not. dusk's own multilayer architecture post describes this one specifically as "validator-run, native and trustless, no external custodians or wrapped assets required," while the incident notice from january ties directly back to the old bep20 bridge address, a completely different, custodial-style mechanism for moving wrapped dusk to bsc.
so that's three separate bridges confirmed: the internal duskds-to-duskevm native bridge, the external bep20/bsc bridge that got hit, and the chainlink cct pathway for eth-solana. all real, all distinct, all sharing the word "bridge" with nothing distinguishing them by name anywhere i've found.
i don't think that's dusk being deceptive, modular architectures genuinely need multiple bridging layers for different jobs. i just think "dusk's bridge had an incident" is doing a lot of unearned precision for a sentence that could mean three different things depending on which one you mean.
does dusk have a single page anywhere that names and distinguishes all three by name in one place? 🧐
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
so that's three separate bridges confirmed: the internal duskds-to-duskevm native bridge, the external bep20/bsc bridge that got hit, and the chainlink cct pathway for eth-solana. all real, all distinct, all sharing the word "bridge" with nothing distinguishing them by name anywhere i've found.
i don't think that's dusk being deceptive, modular architectures genuinely need multiple bridging layers for different jobs. i just think "dusk's bridge had an incident" is doing a lot of unearned precision for a sentence that could mean three different things depending on which one you mean.
does dusk have a single page anywhere that names and distinguishes all three by name in one place? 🧐
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
dusk's own page on hedger makes an admission i didn't expect to find stated so plainly — hedger delivers "complete transactional privacy" but the evm's account-based model "prevents full anonymity," a capability zedger still has. so the two privacy systems living on the same network aren't actually equivalent, and dusk says so itself rather than letting people assume duskevm gets the same guarantee as the native side.
privacy and anonymity get used interchangeably constantly in this space, but they're not the same claim, and honestly i had to read that line on their page twice before i realized they weren't just hedging, they were stating an actual architectural limit. privacy usually means your amounts and balances are hidden. anonymity means your actual identity or address linkage is hidden too. hedger apparently does the first solidly — encrypted balances via elgamal homomorphic encryption plus zk proofs — but the account model underneath still means addresses exist and can potentially be linked across transactions in a way a fully shielded utxo model like zedger avoids.
i think that's a reasonable tradeoff for solidity compatibility, most evm privacy tools don't even get this far. i just don't think "hedger brings confidential transactions to duskevm" gets read by most people as "except for full anonymity," and dusk's own docs are more precise about that gap than the marketing framing tends to be.
does anyone know exactly what an observer could still link together on hedger even with balances fully encrypted? 🧐
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
privacy and anonymity get used interchangeably constantly in this space, but they're not the same claim, and honestly i had to read that line on their page twice before i realized they weren't just hedging, they were stating an actual architectural limit. privacy usually means your amounts and balances are hidden. anonymity means your actual identity or address linkage is hidden too. hedger apparently does the first solidly — encrypted balances via elgamal homomorphic encryption plus zk proofs — but the account model underneath still means addresses exist and can potentially be linked across transactions in a way a fully shielded utxo model like zedger avoids.
i think that's a reasonable tradeoff for solidity compatibility, most evm privacy tools don't even get this far. i just don't think "hedger brings confidential transactions to duskevm" gets read by most people as "except for full anonymity," and dusk's own docs are more precise about that gap than the marketing framing tends to be.
does anyone know exactly what an observer could still link together on hedger even with balances fully encrypted? 🧐
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
Vérifié
Trade sur 30 j $DUSK 362.4 USDT
dusk.network's current homepage describes npex as "eu dlt pilot regime-licensed market infrastructure." that's present tense, done deal language. but dusk's own regulatory edge page, still live on their site, spells out the exact same license — actually, i had to check twice that "dlt-tss" and "dlt pilot regime" were even the same thing before treating this as a real conflict, they are, it's labeled explicitly "(in progress)" there, called the "forthcoming" piece of npex's license suite.
same license, same source, two different tenses. one page treats it as secured, the other as pending. i went looking for a newer announcement confirming npex actually got approved between those two pieces of content and couldn't find one, which doesn't mean it didn't happen, just that i can't confirm it did.
to be fair, this isn't an aggregator mangling dusk's words this time, it's dusk's own site being inconsistent with itself, which honestly feels like a bigger deal than the earlier version of this problem. a regulated-finance protocol should have its own current-status language matching across its own pages.
did npex's dlt-tss approval actually come through, or is the homepage just running ahead of what's confirmed on dusk's own regulatory edge page? 🧐
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
same license, same source, two different tenses. one page treats it as secured, the other as pending. i went looking for a newer announcement confirming npex actually got approved between those two pieces of content and couldn't find one, which doesn't mean it didn't happen, just that i can't confirm it did.
to be fair, this isn't an aggregator mangling dusk's words this time, it's dusk's own site being inconsistent with itself, which honestly feels like a bigger deal than the earlier version of this problem. a regulated-finance protocol should have its own current-status language matching across its own pages.
did npex's dlt-tss approval actually come through, or is the homepage just running ahead of what's confirmed on dusk's own regulatory edge page? 🧐
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
Hello guys let's share some🎁🎁🫂 reward to grab the reward you just need to hit the like and comment button go go before it's too late 🎉🎉😻😻
$PROM $PORTAL $TUT
#SP500FuturesFall
#BrentDrops1.87% .#SamsungFalls8.97%DraggingKospiDown3.24%
#SolanaGovernanceVoteToDoubleDeflationRate
$PROM $PORTAL $TUT
#SP500FuturesFall
#BrentDrops1.87% .#SamsungFalls8.97%DraggingKospiDown3.24%
#SolanaGovernanceVoteToDoubleDeflationRate
a tracker lists "dusk connect & wallet launch" as an april 23rd event. dusk's own account tells a different story in a post dated over a month later — may 28th, calling the wallet and connect sdk "now in beta," chrome and firefox builds still "in review," extension links promised "after approval" — and i actually had to reread that x post twice because i assumed "big unlock for the ecosystem" meant it was already usable, it's explicitly not yet.
those two things can't both be describing a finished launch. either april 23rd was something smaller that got labeled "launch" prematurely by a tracker, or dusk quietly walked something back to beta status for store review after it went out. i can't tell which from what's public.
it's a small gap in the scheme of things, wallet infra shipping in stages isn't unusual for any project. but for something this basic — can i actually install the extension right now or not — a five-week difference between "launched" and "still pending approval" shouldn't be this unclear.
is the dusk wallet extension actually live in the chrome and firefox stores at this point, or still sitting in review since that may post? 🧐
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
those two things can't both be describing a finished launch. either april 23rd was something smaller that got labeled "launch" prematurely by a tracker, or dusk quietly walked something back to beta status for store review after it went out. i can't tell which from what's public.
it's a small gap in the scheme of things, wallet infra shipping in stages isn't unusual for any project. but for something this basic — can i actually install the extension right now or not — a five-week difference between "launched" and "still pending approval" shouldn't be this unclear.
is the dusk wallet extension actually live in the chrome and firefox stores at this point, or still sitting in review since that may post? 🧐
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
Hello guys just give me few minutes...
⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️Got that Binance Square warning about repetitive/copy-paste comments? Don't just read it and move on.
That warning's real — keep it up and it can hit your reach, your monetization, your shot at future campaigns.
If you're still doing the same thing after getting flagged... that's the sign to stop🚫🚫🚫🚫, not push through.
A few extra points now isn't worth torching an account you've put time into....
#Binnacesquare #Binance #creatorpad #campiagns
⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️Got that Binance Square warning about repetitive/copy-paste comments? Don't just read it and move on.
That warning's real — keep it up and it can hit your reach, your monetization, your shot at future campaigns.
If you're still doing the same thing after getting flagged... that's the sign to stop🚫🚫🚫🚫, not push through.
A few extra points now isn't worth torching an account you've put time into....
#Binnacesquare #Binance #creatorpad #campiagns
Binance Square Official
·
--
Real conversation is what makes Binance Square worth being part of.
- Posting a high volume of repetitive, templated, AI-generated, or empty comments, far more than a normal user would, goes against our rules. In serious cases it can lead to losing monetization eligibility and being muted.
- The same goes for accounts that keep trading templated replies to fake engagement for points or rewards. It hurts your account health and reach, and serious cases can also lose monetization eligibility.
Based on the above, and since many of you have shared feedback about CreatorPad, we reviewed the award winners of the BABY CreatorPad. Here's what we found:
- 27 accounts were commenting at rates far beyond normal interaction. Their reward eligibility has been revoked, they've been flagged as a violation.
- 265 accounts were part of reciprocal spamming. They've been warned, and it's been noted on the account.
Binance Square is about real community interaction. We've added detection for meaningless comment spam, small-circle reciprocal commenting, and repeatedly asking others to leave comments. From this announcement on, it applies to all features and campaigns going forward, including the current CreatorPad campaigns. Anyone whose behavior falls into these patterns might lose reward eligibility.
Thank you to everyone who keeps creating with care. Let's keep the community fair, together.
We'd also like to hear from you. Drop your thoughts on CreatorPad and Binance Square in the comments — we'll pick 3 commenters to receive a reward red packet. Your honest feedback helps us make this better.
- Posting a high volume of repetitive, templated, AI-generated, or empty comments, far more than a normal user would, goes against our rules. In serious cases it can lead to losing monetization eligibility and being muted.
- The same goes for accounts that keep trading templated replies to fake engagement for points or rewards. It hurts your account health and reach, and serious cases can also lose monetization eligibility.
Based on the above, and since many of you have shared feedback about CreatorPad, we reviewed the award winners of the BABY CreatorPad. Here's what we found:
- 27 accounts were commenting at rates far beyond normal interaction. Their reward eligibility has been revoked, they've been flagged as a violation.
- 265 accounts were part of reciprocal spamming. They've been warned, and it's been noted on the account.
Binance Square is about real community interaction. We've added detection for meaningless comment spam, small-circle reciprocal commenting, and repeatedly asking others to leave comments. From this announcement on, it applies to all features and campaigns going forward, including the current CreatorPad campaigns. Anyone whose behavior falls into these patterns might lose reward eligibility.
Thank you to everyone who keeps creating with care. Let's keep the community fair, together.
We'd also like to hear from you. Drop your thoughts on CreatorPad and Binance Square in the comments — we'll pick 3 commenters to receive a reward red packet. Your honest feedback helps us make this better.
Connectez-vous pour découvrir plus de contenu