Tai Smilee
Verified Creator
Crypto Trader | Market Insights | Binance Square Creator | DM for Collab & Promo @taihaycuoii
High-Frequency Trader
3.5 Years
49 Following
6.9K+ Followers
3.4K+ Liked
58 Shared
Posts
All
Quotes
Videos
Live
Thank🥰
Binance Square Official
·
--
Congratulations to the winners who won the 1BNB surprise drop from Binance Square on Feb 3 for your content. Keep it up and continue to share good quality insights with unique value.
@Holaitsak47 :When the SAFU Fund Buys BTC, I Pay Attention
@Tai Smilee :Bạn có thể BUY khi thấy mô hình nến này
@K L A I :SOL at 100: The Moment of Truth for Solana!
@Yellow Panther :Clawdbot/openclaw mania, wtf is moltbook, crypto crashing, and more
@Giannis Andreou :Top Crypto Investments for the Next Cycle
@Holaitsak47 :When the SAFU Fund Buys BTC, I Pay Attention
@Tai Smilee :Bạn có thể BUY khi thấy mô hình nến này
@K L A I :SOL at 100: The Moment of Truth for Solana!
@Yellow Panther :Clawdbot/openclaw mania, wtf is moltbook, crypto crashing, and more
@Giannis Andreou :Top Crypto Investments for the Next Cycle
In the past 24 hours, the market has witnessed a strong liquidation:
• 101,395 traders were liquidated
• Total value: 292.6 million USD
The largest single liquidation order occurred on B, with:
• $BTC
• Value of 10.5 million USD
The liquidation flow shows that leverage pressure is still mainly concentrated on BTC and $ETH , where most of the high-leverage positions are being forced out of the market.
Such liquidations do not themselves indicate a trend.
But they always reveal one thing: which side is overcrowded and too late.
The market does not punish you for being wrong in direction,
but for being in the wrong position and using the wrong leverage.
• 101,395 traders were liquidated
• Total value: 292.6 million USD
The largest single liquidation order occurred on B, with:
• $BTC
• Value of 10.5 million USD
The liquidation flow shows that leverage pressure is still mainly concentrated on BTC and $ETH , where most of the high-leverage positions are being forced out of the market.
Such liquidations do not themselves indicate a trend.
But they always reveal one thing: which side is overcrowded and too late.
The market does not punish you for being wrong in direction,
but for being in the wrong position and using the wrong leverage.
Vitalik Buterin has just executed a series of transactions totaling 490 ETH, worth over 1.1 million USD.
The transactions are fragmented, transferred through Cow Protocol, showing that this is not just a 'random order throw', but a deliberate action that is carried out quite systematically.
Of course, with Vitalik's asset scale, this amount is not large enough to exert market pressure. But the noteworthy aspect is not the money, but the timing and manner of the transaction.
Is this just:
• Personal spending?
Of course, with Vitalik's asset scale, this amount is not large enough to exert market pressure. But the noteworthy aspect is not the money, but the timing and manner of the transaction.
Is this just:
• Personal spending?
Why do most blockchains pursue applications, while true financial value lies in transactions?
This question becomes increasingly clear as the crypto ecosystem witnesses a slew of multi-purpose chains emerging, each trying to become a platform for everything: DeFi, NFT, gaming, social, AI. Narratively, this approach creates a sense of rapid growth. But systematically, it also brings about liquidity fragmentation, unstable usage levels, and a heavy reliance on incentives.
Many chains seem 'busy' in the short term, but activity declines sharply as rewards dwindle. This reflects a familiar confusion in the market: we often confuse application activity with transaction value. Not every transaction has the same economic significance, and not every crowded ecosystem can sustain a viable cash flow.
Many chains seem 'busy' in the short term, but activity declines sharply as rewards dwindle. This reflects a familiar confusion in the market: we often confuse application activity with transaction value. Not every transaction has the same economic significance, and not every crowded ecosystem can sustain a viable cash flow.
Vanar and the advantage that many blockchains dare not pursue
When observing the current Layer-1 race and AI-native blockchain, one can easily notice a familiar pattern: every project tries to shout louder. Higher TPS, bigger ecosystems, more AI, more impressive partners. The technical comparison tables keep getting longer, but paradoxically, the number of products actually used by users does not increase accordingly.
In this context, @Vanarchain appears with a rather quiet approach. Instead of trying to win in the marketing battle, Vanar focuses on solving a more fundamental, less talked about problem, but one that is decisive: the experience of builders and the ability to deploy real products in everyday life.
In this context, @Vanarchain appears with a rather quiet approach. Instead of trying to win in the marketing battle, Vanar focuses on solving a more fundamental, less talked about problem, but one that is decisive: the experience of builders and the ability to deploy real products in everyday life.
You can BUY when you see this candle pattern
$BTC $XAU
$BTC $XAU
Today I saw many posts of siblings p2p being blocked by the bank.
Plasma – not exciting, but makes one stop to think
To be honest, the first time I saw @Plasma placed next to Solana or Tron, my first reaction was... skepticism. This market has witnessed too many "stablecoin chains" appear and then disappear, most of them talking about better UX but ultimately not changing much about how people use crypto to hold and transfer money.
But when I looked closer at #Plasma , I started to see something different.
Plasma seems to have no desire to join the multipurpose L1 race. It chooses a very narrow path, even somewhat "stubborn": if the majority of crypto users only care about stablecoins, then just build straight for stablecoins, no need to pretend to do everything else.
Compared to Ethereum L2, Plasma is like a space that has been cleared from the start. L2 still carries the complexity of Ethereum: bridge, gas token, tangled UX. Plasma is simpler: fast finality, EVM so devs don't have to relearn, and transferring USDT requires no gas. It may not sound sexy, but it aligns very well with the habits of the majority.
Compared to Solana, Plasma does not boast TPS. It does not try to impress. The feeling of Plasma is wanting to "disappear" into the background, like a true payment infrastructure.
And Tron? This is the real competitor. Tron’s dominance in USDT is not easily shaken. Neo's security tied to Bitcoin is a plus, but for retail, that’s not something they perceive immediately.
What still concerns me is distribution. No matter how good the UX is, it’s meaningless if it can’t attract users and partners.
Therefore, I can't yet call this a project that excites me. But it’s interesting enough to keep an eye on — and in this market, that is already rare.
$XPL
To be honest, the first time I saw @Plasma placed next to Solana or Tron, my first reaction was... skepticism. This market has witnessed too many "stablecoin chains" appear and then disappear, most of them talking about better UX but ultimately not changing much about how people use crypto to hold and transfer money.
But when I looked closer at #Plasma , I started to see something different.
Plasma seems to have no desire to join the multipurpose L1 race. It chooses a very narrow path, even somewhat "stubborn": if the majority of crypto users only care about stablecoins, then just build straight for stablecoins, no need to pretend to do everything else.
Compared to Ethereum L2, Plasma is like a space that has been cleared from the start. L2 still carries the complexity of Ethereum: bridge, gas token, tangled UX. Plasma is simpler: fast finality, EVM so devs don't have to relearn, and transferring USDT requires no gas. It may not sound sexy, but it aligns very well with the habits of the majority.
Compared to Solana, Plasma does not boast TPS. It does not try to impress. The feeling of Plasma is wanting to "disappear" into the background, like a true payment infrastructure.
And Tron? This is the real competitor. Tron’s dominance in USDT is not easily shaken. Neo's security tied to Bitcoin is a plus, but for retail, that’s not something they perceive immediately.
What still concerns me is distribution. No matter how good the UX is, it’s meaningless if it can’t attract users and partners.
Therefore, I can't yet call this a project that excites me. But it’s interesting enough to keep an eye on — and in this market, that is already rare.
$XPL
Bitcoin enters the 'Sell-Off' zone for the first time since December 2023
Bitcoin ( $BTC ) has officially entered the 'Sell-Off' zone for the first time since December 2023, according to long-term regression models. This is the price range that Bitcoin typically reaches when it has risen close to the upper boundary of the long-term uptrend, where profit-taking, distribution, and strong volatility begin to appear.
However, entering the Sell-Off zone does not mean that the cycle has ended. In previous cycles, Bitcoin has oscillated quite a bit in this zone, going through corrections or sideways accumulation before determining the next major trend. This indicates that the risk/reward ratio for new long positions is no longer attractive, while the market gradually shifts to a more cautious state.
However, entering the Sell-Off zone does not mean that the cycle has ended. In previous cycles, Bitcoin has oscillated quite a bit in this zone, going through corrections or sideways accumulation before determining the next major trend. This indicates that the risk/reward ratio for new long positions is no longer attractive, while the market gradually shifts to a more cautious state.
Tom Lee faces 'storm of criticism' as ETH falls below $2,200 – Is the issue with the forecast or the market?
Tom Lee, a famous analyst and the man behind Bitmine, is becoming the center of controversy as the price of Ethereum ($ETH ) unexpectedly dropped below the $2,200 mark this week. This development is completely contrary to his previous forecast, as Tom Lee once suggested that ETH could reach $7,000 – $9,000 during the same period.
The reality of the market is much harsher. As of now, ETH has lost more than 52% compared to its recent peak, reflecting strong selling pressure and a widespread risk-averse sentiment across the crypto market. Not only Ethereum, Bitcoin (BTC) is also not immune to the general trend as it fell below $77,824, far lower than the target of $180,000 that Tom Lee had previously set.
The reality of the market is much harsher. As of now, ETH has lost more than 52% compared to its recent peak, reflecting strong selling pressure and a widespread risk-averse sentiment across the crypto market. Not only Ethereum, Bitcoin (BTC) is also not immune to the general trend as it fell below $77,824, far lower than the target of $180,000 that Tom Lee had previously set.
In the previous video, I made a video about the bearish candle model.
In this video, I will talk about the bullish candle model that you can buy when you see these 3 models
$BTC $XAU
In this video, I will talk about the bullish candle model that you can buy when you see these 3 models
$BTC $XAU
Each cycle, $BTC usually adjusts 75–85% from the same trend line.
The current decline is still not significant → the possibility of further decline remains.
The current decline is still not significant → the possibility of further decline remains.
How to read candlestick patterns in trading
Mark the 14th – A critical moment for Bitcoin
Mark your calendar for the 14th. In the past, $BTC has dropped after 8 out of 8 pivot points, each time decreasing by at least 4%. History shows that this is a very sensitive time frame and price structure.
However, this time the scenario does not necessarily have to repeat in a negative direction. If the price continues to adjust and hits the pivot point, that could be the area where the risk/reward ratio starts to become attractive for a Long position, instead of continuing to bet on a downward trend.
However, this time the scenario does not necessarily have to repeat in a negative direction. If the price continues to adjust and hits the pivot point, that could be the area where the risk/reward ratio starts to become attractive for a Long position, instead of continuing to bet on a downward trend.
Vietnam's tech unicorn brings Tet $C98 has appeared on today's top gainers ranking
Scalping 3 EMA lines 25:50:100
Bitcoin around $78K – wiped clean or capitulation?
Bitcoin has retreated to the $78,441 area, almost erasing most of the increase from the peak of $124,700 (10/2025). However, this is not a panic sell-off, but rather structural: prices are decreasing slowly → forced liquidations → weak ETF capital flows → expectations for easing policy not materializing.
The main factors weighing on BTC:
• The prospect of a more hawkish Fed (related to the nomination of Kevin Warsh) is strengthening the USD and reducing risk appetite.
The main factors weighing on BTC:
• The prospect of a more hawkish Fed (related to the nomination of Kevin Warsh) is strengthening the USD and reducing risk appetite.
Does Plasma support DeFi, or is it just meant for payments to be lighter?
Tonight the market is slightly recovering, so I'm in the mood to write a bit about @Plasma . I've seen many people ask quite directly: Can Plasma do DeFi, or was it created just to transfer money securely?
In my opinion, Plasma wasn't intended to be a true crypto "DeFi playground" from the start. It was designed around a very specific task: to transfer stablecoins quickly, with extremely low fees and minimal impact from short-term speculative activities.
If we talk about DeFi in a simple way, like escrow, settlement, conditional payments, or fixed cash flows, then Plasma still performs well. These use cases don't need deep liquidity, complex protocol integration, just the money needs to move correctly, cheaply, and without errors.
However, when DeFi starts to demand farming, leverage, circular strategies, or large liquidity pools, Plasma is not the optimal choice. The features Plasma optimizes for stability inadvertently become barriers for the fast-paced DeFi model.
Therefore, I believe Plasma wasn't created to compete with general DeFi chains. It is safest and most reasonable when used as a stable payment layer where cash flow is steady, drama is minimal, and risk management is easier for long-term users. DYOR!
$XPL #Plasma
Tonight the market is slightly recovering, so I'm in the mood to write a bit about @Plasma . I've seen many people ask quite directly: Can Plasma do DeFi, or was it created just to transfer money securely?
In my opinion, Plasma wasn't intended to be a true crypto "DeFi playground" from the start. It was designed around a very specific task: to transfer stablecoins quickly, with extremely low fees and minimal impact from short-term speculative activities.
If we talk about DeFi in a simple way, like escrow, settlement, conditional payments, or fixed cash flows, then Plasma still performs well. These use cases don't need deep liquidity, complex protocol integration, just the money needs to move correctly, cheaply, and without errors.
However, when DeFi starts to demand farming, leverage, circular strategies, or large liquidity pools, Plasma is not the optimal choice. The features Plasma optimizes for stability inadvertently become barriers for the fast-paced DeFi model.
Therefore, I believe Plasma wasn't created to compete with general DeFi chains. It is safest and most reasonable when used as a stable payment layer where cash flow is steady, drama is minimal, and risk management is easier for long-term users. DYOR!
$XPL #Plasma
Predictable costs: the boring breakthrough of Vanar
Brothers can observe popular debates in crypto, with much of the attention often focused on noisy topics: how 'pure' decentralization is, how high the TPS can be, or which chain has more flashy features. But at a deeper layer, what really influences usability is discussed much less: the uncertainty about costs.
Anyone or any project using products on the blockchain has experienced this familiar feeling. One day transaction fees are almost zero, the next day the same action costs a few dollars, or even dozens of dollars. Users don’t care why this happens. They just find the experience becoming unpleasant. The team cannot budget, the support department is overwhelmed, and all automation plans become fragile. This issue is even more serious when the application is not meant for humans to click sporadically, but for continuously running processes: bots, AI agents, background tasks, or microtransactions.
Anyone or any project using products on the blockchain has experienced this familiar feeling. One day transaction fees are almost zero, the next day the same action costs a few dollars, or even dozens of dollars. Users don’t care why this happens. They just find the experience becoming unpleasant. The team cannot budget, the support department is overwhelmed, and all automation plans become fragile. This issue is even more serious when the application is not meant for humans to click sporadically, but for continuously running processes: bots, AI agents, background tasks, or microtransactions.
Login to explore more contents