Jeonlees
Verified Creator
🍏web3实战派｜主攻币安alpha空投、交易比赛｜分享最新币圈撸毛图文教程、活动资讯 ｜Defi_Ag社区管理员｜欢迎交流一起成长
711 Following
53.1K+ Followers
39.4K Liked
2.3K+ Shared
All
Quotes
Videos
Live
See original
Right after asking CZ uncle my question, I was immediately attacked...
I feel extremely honored to be selected as the speaker to ask CZ uncle a question. My question is roughly:
I'm a female KOL, and I've noticed that there are many attacks against women who are KOLs on X; also, all kinds of resources seem to be going to big KOLs. So I'd like to ask CZ uncle, what advice do you have for female KOLs just starting out?
I was really nervous at that moment, my voice was trembling, and I couldn't express myself clearly. My mind was completely blank, so I prepared a draft in advance. Actually, the core of my question is:
Do new KOLs still have a chance?
Of course, because I've recently seen a lot of negative and extremely disrespectful comments toward women, so I added the word 'women' to emphasize that I don't want people to have too many biases toward female KOLs. But when I started speaking, I forgot my words and couldn't express myself fully.
I'm a female KOL, and I've noticed that there are many attacks against women who are KOLs on X; also, all kinds of resources seem to be going to big KOLs. So I'd like to ask CZ uncle, what advice do you have for female KOLs just starting out?
I was really nervous at that moment, my voice was trembling, and I couldn't express myself clearly. My mind was completely blank, so I prepared a draft in advance. Actually, the core of my question is:
Do new KOLs still have a chance?
Of course, because I've recently seen a lot of negative and extremely disrespectful comments toward women, so I added the word 'women' to emphasize that I don't want people to have too many biases toward female KOLs. But when I started speaking, I forgot my words and couldn't express myself fully.
See original
Not... can you please wait until I wake up next time 😭
I bought the hero post last night at midnight, then went to sleep
I woke up and the sky fell apart, it's profitable, but it's dropped so much it's almost gone 😭, this damn good sleep
#Strategy增持比特币
I bought the hero post last night at midnight, then went to sleep
I woke up and the sky fell apart, it's profitable, but it's dropped so much it's almost gone 😭, this damn good sleep
#Strategy增持比特币
See original
I've made the 'moat' of Dusk more concrete: it's not about technological superiority, but the courage to write gray areas into the rules.
Brothers, I want to write about something more aligned with Dusk, and also harder to address: I think the real moat of Dusk Foundation might not be how strong its privacy is, nor how compelling its compliance narrative, but whether it dares to explicitly include those gray areas everyone avoids, embedding them into the rules so the system can handle 'unclear situations'.
Why am I suddenly fixating on this? Because I've realized how much we tend to talk about 'normal situations' when discussing projects. Normal situations are easy to handle: transactions succeed, processes go smoothly, data validates, and user experience is good. But what's truly valuable in the financial world often lies in 'non-normal situations.' Disputes, controversies, ambiguous authorization boundaries, conflicting disclosure information, contracts clashing with real-world rules—these are the very areas that determine whether you can handle serious assets.
Why am I suddenly fixating on this? Because I've realized how much we tend to talk about 'normal situations' when discussing projects. Normal situations are easy to handle: transactions succeed, processes go smoothly, data validates, and user experience is good. But what's truly valuable in the financial world often lies in 'non-normal situations.' Disputes, controversies, ambiguous authorization boundaries, conflicting disclosure information, contracts clashing with real-world rules—these are the very areas that determine whether you can handle serious assets.
See original
I traced back from Grayscale's news to Walrus: when a protocol starts being 'treated as an asset,' what it should really fear is becoming too much like a coin
I'll share a very honest feeling: the moment I saw Grayscale providing Trust for Walrus, my first reaction wasn't 'bullish surge,' but rather 'trouble is coming.' Because once something gets packaged as a configurable asset, it gets placed into an entirely different evaluation framework — no longer judged solely on technical merit or ecosystem热度, but increasingly on your ability to explain risk, cash flow logic (even if indirect), and long-term supply-demand dynamics. For an infrastructure project, this is actually pressure, not pure glamour.
See original
I see Dusk as a mirror: it helps me see whether I'm truly 'investing' or just 'chasing the buzz'
I see Dusk as a mirror: it helps me see whether I'm truly 'investing' or just 'chasing the buzz'
Brothers, I'm going to rewrite this in a different way. I'm no longer starting from Dusk itself, but from myself. Because I've realized the most interesting thing about a project like Dusk isn't what it's done today, but how it forces you to confront one thing: do you want a story that excites you, or a system that can actually stand up in reality?
I must first admit an unseemly truth. In the past, I was really easily swayed by the 'sense of excitement' when looking at projects. Who was talking, who was promoting, who was rising, who had an ecosystem map, who had a bunch of partnerships with names that sounded impressive. Then I would naturally treat 'everyone is paying attention' as a kind of security.
Brothers, I'm going to rewrite this in a different way. I'm no longer starting from Dusk itself, but from myself. Because I've realized the most interesting thing about a project like Dusk isn't what it's done today, but how it forces you to confront one thing: do you want a story that excites you, or a system that can actually stand up in reality?
I must first admit an unseemly truth. In the past, I was really easily swayed by the 'sense of excitement' when looking at projects. Who was talking, who was promoting, who was rising, who had an ecosystem map, who had a bunch of partnerships with names that sounded impressive. Then I would naturally treat 'everyone is paying attention' as a kind of security.
See original
Last night, while scrolling Binance Square, it was actually the @dusk_foundation's CreatorPad event that pulled me back: the reward pool directly allocated 3,059,210 $DUSK tokens. This 'real money for content and followers' strategy clearly shows they're currently short on users and use cases, not just concepts. #Dusk $DUSK
My assessment of Dusk has become more pragmatic: its strongest point isn't just 'privacy,' but rather a 'compliant and usable' transaction pathway. Their talk about DuskTrade, moving over €300 million in securities assets onto the blockchain, and launching the waitlist in January 2026—if all of this actually materializes, the narrative will shift from 'is the technology good?' to 'are there real trades happening?' This is especially valuable right now as RWA and Reg-DeFi gain momentum.
But to be safe: $DUSK currently trades around $0.07, with a market cap of a few million USD and 24-hour volume in the tens of millions—this market sentiment reflects 'watchlist' status, not 'faith-based' conviction. I'll be monitoring two things: whether there's continuous growth after the waitlist launch, and whether DuskTrade can generate verifiable on-chain trading data. @Dusk #Dusk $DUSK
My assessment of Dusk has become more pragmatic: its strongest point isn't just 'privacy,' but rather a 'compliant and usable' transaction pathway. Their talk about DuskTrade, moving over €300 million in securities assets onto the blockchain, and launching the waitlist in January 2026—if all of this actually materializes, the narrative will shift from 'is the technology good?' to 'are there real trades happening?' This is especially valuable right now as RWA and Reg-DeFi gain momentum.
But to be safe: $DUSK currently trades around $0.07, with a market cap of a few million USD and 24-hour volume in the tens of millions—this market sentiment reflects 'watchlist' status, not 'faith-based' conviction. I'll be monitoring two things: whether there's continuous growth after the waitlist launch, and whether DuskTrade can generate verifiable on-chain trading data. @Dusk #Dusk $DUSK
See original
$CAI not, you're called cai, how can you be so bad, sent down airdrop of 40u, ended up dropping to below 10u, thought there would be a rebound, bought in 100u, but it kept dropping, then added 4 more positions, currently down 300u
Everyone just stick to brushing alpha, the losses aren't even covered by the airdrop, today's new account cost 130u, so expensive, so expensive
#Strategy增持比特币
Everyone just stick to brushing alpha, the losses aren't even covered by the airdrop, today's new account cost 130u, so expensive, so expensive
#Strategy增持比特币
See original
I saw the wallet booster investment message too late, I directly put everything in the wallet.
I was planning to transfer again later, thinking it would be gone immediately
But it actually lasted more than 5 minutes, I thought it would disappear instantly
I managed to grab a 3k quota by chance...
#Bitway
I was planning to transfer again later, thinking it would be gone immediately
But it actually lasted more than 5 minutes, I thought it would disappear instantly
I managed to grab a 3k quota by chance...
#Bitway
See original
I've translated Dusk's issue into a more blunt statement: what it really aims to do is 'teach the chain to shut up'
Brothers, I'm switching to a harsher, more direct expression. We usually treat blockchain as a 'talkative system'—it records everything, makes everything public, and allows everyone to peek. But once you place it in regulated assets or institutional funds scenarios, you suddenly realize a ridiculous flaw: the chain talks too much, even when it shouldn't.
What Dusk Foundation is doing in my eyes, put simply, is four words: make the chain shut up. Not to lose its verifiability, but to learn when not to speak and when to speak, and when it does speak, it must have boundaries.
What Dusk Foundation is doing in my eyes, put simply, is four words: make the chain shut up. Not to lose its verifiability, but to learn when not to speak and when to speak, and when it does speak, it must have boundaries.
See original
I Treat Dusk as an 'Anti-Common-Sense Experiment': What If a Project Survives Without Traffic or Emotion?
Brothers, I'm going to approach this from a different angle. Instead of writing about what it solves, I'll write about how it 'exists' in the market. Because lately, I've increasingly realized that many projects in the crypto space don't fail due to technical shortcomings or wrong roadmaps—they simply can't survive in the attention economy. Once attention fades, they vanish as if they never existed.
Dusk Foundation, to me, feels like an anti-common-sense experiment: it hardly relies on traffic, doesn't cater to emotions much, and avoids exaggerated narratives to lure people in. So what does it actually rely on to exist? If it can survive, it suggests there might indeed be another way to thrive in the market.
Dusk Foundation, to me, feels like an anti-common-sense experiment: it hardly relies on traffic, doesn't cater to emotions much, and avoids exaggerated narratives to lure people in. So what does it actually rely on to exist? If it can survive, it suggests there might indeed be another way to thrive in the market.
See original
I wrote a 'reverse checklist' for Dusk: as long as it doesn't mess up on three things, I'll keep watching
Brothers, this post won't follow long logical deductions or talk about fancy-sounding concepts. Instead, I'll use a method more like how I actually monitor the market and projects: creating a 'reverse checklist.' Simply put, many projects don't fail because they can't do something, but because they do the wrong thing. Especially in areas like compliance and privacy, once you go off track, it's very hard to correct course later.
My stance on Dusk Foundation has always been 'worth watching, but don't get carried away.' So how do I stay observant without being led by the narrative? I set myself three very specific boundaries. As long as Dusk doesn't cross these three red lines, I'm willing to give it time. If it does, I'll immediately downgrade it from my priority watchlist—no hesitation.
My stance on Dusk Foundation has always been 'worth watching, but don't get carried away.' So how do I stay observant without being led by the narrative? I set myself three very specific boundaries. As long as Dusk doesn't cross these three red lines, I'm willing to give it time. If it does, I'll immediately downgrade it from my priority watchlist—no hesitation.
See original
Today I'm writing a 'anti-doping' piece specifically about infrastructure like Walrus: what tricks people most easily into it isn't the story, but the feeling that you've understood it
Brothers, let me say something unpleasant: what I fear most in the crypto space is the illusion of 'I get it.' Especially when looking at infrastructure projects, the more logically consistent and technically solid they seem, the more likely you are to develop a strange sense of security—like if the technology is right, success is guaranteed. Then you get carried away, start adding more, treat it as a belief, and eventually get reality-checked: the tech wasn't wrong, but the market and demand didn't play along.
After the walrus gained popularity recently, I actually forced myself to do one thing: simulate pushing it as a project that could fail. Not to undermine it, but to write down the most likely failure paths, to see whether it's truly the kind of infrastructure that can withstand pressure. If you don't take this step, all the 'deep analysis' you write is essentially just making excuses for yourself.
After the walrus gained popularity recently, I actually forced myself to do one thing: simulate pushing it as a project that could fail. Not to undermine it, but to write down the most likely failure paths, to see whether it's truly the kind of infrastructure that can withstand pressure. If you don't take this step, all the 'deep analysis' you write is essentially just making excuses for yourself.
See original
I keep revisiting Dusk recently, not because of its performance, but because I can't seem to form a simple conclusion about it
I'm being honest, I haven't felt this way about a project in a long time.
It's neither bullish nor bearish; every time I'm about to make a judgment on it, I pause.
Dusk Foundation is exactly that kind of thing.
I didn't open it because of its price fluctuations. It's not a project you can instantly judge as 'suitable to join' at first glance. More often, I come across related information or, while comparing other projects, suddenly think: if I ever needed to put some 'non-risky' funds on the blockchain, would anyone pick this one?
It's neither bullish nor bearish; every time I'm about to make a judgment on it, I pause.
Dusk Foundation is exactly that kind of thing.
I didn't open it because of its price fluctuations. It's not a project you can instantly judge as 'suitable to join' at first glance. More often, I come across related information or, while comparing other projects, suddenly think: if I ever needed to put some 'non-risky' funds on the blockchain, would anyone pick this one?
See original
New booster is上线了, the new page looks really ugly, and the translation function has disappeared. Daily meticulous updates, but it's still not as good as before.
Participation standard above 61 points, 100,000名额, participating in the event deducts 5 points
(Now it's really alpha point inflation, there are too many points, developers are trying their best to deduct points from everyone)
1️⃣ Follow, share
2️⃣ Save 10u
The 10u saved in the official tutorial has wear and tear, I directly saved 11u
#booster
Participation standard above 61 points, 100,000名额, participating in the event deducts 5 points
(Now it's really alpha point inflation, there are too many points, developers are trying their best to deduct points from everyone)
1️⃣ Follow, share
2️⃣ Save 10u
The 10u saved in the official tutorial has wear and tear, I directly saved 11u
#booster
See original
As soon as I woke up, I saw $LISA dropped by 50%... My god, I've been using this as a stablecoin these days, and with only five days left, it dropped by 50%—what a huge guillotine. Luckily, I have the habit of checking after each withdrawal, otherwise it would've been a disaster 😭
Alpha is struggling, alpha coins are also guillotines. Yesterday it was $TIMI , today it's Lisa… So tough, so tough...
Alpha is struggling, alpha coins are also guillotines. Yesterday it was $TIMI , today it's Lisa… So tough, so tough...
See original
I've set a 'very strict passing threshold' for Dusk: Don't talk to me about the future—first prove you can make a small thing work as a closed loop
Brothers, in this post I'm switching to a completely different approach. I won't talk about grand narratives or phrases like 'financial infrastructure' that sound impressive but are easy to empty. Lately, as I've been writing more projects, I've realized the biggest trap that misleads people is everyone's obsession with the future—eventually, everyone claims they'll win. But what truly separates good projects from the rest are the small details, the closed loops, those things you can confidently say 'this actually works' after completing them.
So I've set a very strict passing threshold for Dusk Foundation: don't show me a 10-year blueprint first. Instead, tell me—can you complete an on-chain transaction related to regulated assets from start to finish today, without relying on manual intervention in between?
So I've set a very strict passing threshold for Dusk Foundation: don't show me a 10-year blueprint first. Instead, tell me—can you complete an on-chain transaction related to regulated assets from start to finish today, without relying on manual intervention in between?
See original
I'm viewing Walrus as a 'blockchain logistics science': what truly determines its value isn't the glamorous topics people love to discuss, but the dirty work no one wants to talk about.
Let me say something a bit harsh: what's most underestimated in the crypto world is never 'new narratives,' but 'logistics.' What do people talk about every day? Performance, TPS, modularity, AI, RWA, narrative rotation... But when an application actually needs to survive, what drives people crazy first is logistics: how to store data, retrieve it, migrate it, back it up, and who takes responsibility when things go wrong.
Walrus, the more I look at this project recently, the more I feel it's not about telling dreams—it's more about logistics. Logistics isn't romantic, but if logistics aren't handled well, no story can come to life.
Walrus, the more I look at this project recently, the more I feel it's not about telling dreams—it's more about logistics. Logistics isn't romantic, but if logistics aren't handled well, no story can come to life.
See original
My way of tracking Dusk is very 'anti-crypto-culture': I don't ask how much it can rise, I only ask whether it can survive being misunderstood 100 times without collapsing
Brothers, in this post I'll shift perspective again. Instead of diving into hard terms like 'compliance,' 'privacy,' or 'platform integration,' I'll speak from a more human, long-term observer standpoint: I assess whether Dusk Foundation has long-term viability not by how hot it is today, but by whether it can endure constant misunderstanding, neglect, and ridicule.
To be honest, the projects that are hardest to survive in the crypto world aren't those without technical skills, but those working on slow, dirty, unsexy yet essential tasks. These projects are most likely to be abandoned by the market halfway through. As soon as your momentum drops and the narrative breaks, people start saying 'it's dead.' Then you're forced to choose: either cater to the market for short-term excitement, or keep moving forward at your own pace. Most projects die right at this crossroads.
To be honest, the projects that are hardest to survive in the crypto world aren't those without technical skills, but those working on slow, dirty, unsexy yet essential tasks. These projects are most likely to be abandoned by the market halfway through. As soon as your momentum drops and the narrative breaks, people start saying 'it's dead.' Then you're forced to choose: either cater to the market for short-term excitement, or keep moving forward at your own pace. Most projects die right at this crossroads.
See original
I Conducted the 'Dumbest Stress Test' on Walrus: Assuming I had to put my product's core data into it tomorrow, where would I get stuck in three steps
I won't talk about the big picture here; I'll just focus on one thing: imagine I'm someone about to launch a product, and I'll work my way down from there. I've noticed that many storage projects quickly drift into 'the future world' when discussed, but what actually determines whether you'll use it is those dull, practical questions: How do I integrate it? How do I pay for it? How can I ensure I can retrieve it in six months? If something goes wrong, can I identify the responsible party?
So I followed this path to see whether Walrus can pass the 'pre-launch anxiety test' in my mind.
Step one: Would I dare to put my core data into it
So I followed this path to see whether Walrus can pass the 'pre-launch anxiety test' in my mind.
Step one: Would I dare to put my core data into it
Login to explore more contents