Joined March 2021
447 Photos and videos
My Thoughts about @Stacks right now 1/ Stacks SIP (PoX) review: STX is now heading toward permanent issuance The core of this proposal is restoring the block reward permanently to 1,000 STX. Originally Stacks was designed to taper off (1,000 → 500 → 250 → 125 → 72.5 …), eventually approaching a near-zero issuance asset, but going forward it becomes a coin carrying roughly 3% annual inflation. The stated rationale is that to keep paying yield to native BTC stakers, the STX mining reward has to stay at least at some minimum floor, and this change is meant to sustain that. The positive case: Under this change, BTC bidding to mine the 1,000 STX issued each block continues, PoX yield keeps getting paid out, and BTC holders can earn stable yield on the Stacks network. The pitch is roughly: "Stake native BTC at ~3% for two years and you recoup the equivalent of a 5% STX position; keep it locked for additional yield; issuance keeps flowing, so the incentive to stake is more than enough." Looking at staking difficulty and several other angles, I do think Stacks has become the most stable and rational model among protocols currently generating yield on BTC. If that rationality spreads through the market and large numbers of institutional and retail BTC holders take up native STX staking, they keep locking STX supply, and a scenario where the STX price rises in proportion is plausible. That said, with only 1,000 STX per block, even if, say, 100,000 BTC flowed in, a coinbase reward at that level isn't sustainable against it. A perpetual virtuous cycle is unrealistic; the upward momentum holds only up to some roughly fixed cap. (And given they've already changed this 3–4 times in two years, who's to say they won't just bump the coinbase reward again when the time comes?) So in the good case, Stacks establishes itself as the flagship of BTC yield: institutions buy at least ~5% STX against their BTC principal and start by staking it, buy-side demand is sufficient, and a lot of supply gets locked up in staking. A genuinely positive scenario. 2/ The negative case: My problem is that this entire discussion centers on BTC stakers, with the existing $STX holders left out completely. It amounts to: "Eventually~ once BTC staking activates the network~ the native BTC stakers will surely use the STX network too~", and to me it just looks like lavishing rewards on native BTC stakers up front. As it stands, the model pays interest to people for merely holding native BTC in their own wallet. Nothing changes for actual network users. At a minimum that capital should be put into LPs, or at least show up as TVL to grow the network's weight, but it does neither. They talk about liquid staking tokens eventually emerging on top of this, injecting liquidity through them, and capital that profited here later allocating into the STX network. But if so, they should bring that along, or at least show there's a team building it. As designed, no matter how I look at it, only institutional BTC holders free-ride on the 3%, and they can spit it back out once they've drained the honey. Institutions get taken care of; existing holders get neglected. That's how it feels. For this reason, I've concluded there's no need to hold STX outright, and exposure of just ~5% against BTC is the right call. It's become a coin you don't need to buy much of. 3/ Separately, I think the foundation is being somewhat deliberately misleading. Claiming the additional issuance is "less than 1% of daily volume". When you unpack it, this is a coin that now inflates ~3% a year, yet they want the focus only on "blocks switch to 1,000 STX now." Pointing out that the top-50 crypto average inflation is 15.9% so theirs is "low" (saying nothing about how, as an earlier launch, they've already paid out that much in rewards). Don't they even claim that STX-only stackers aren't worse off, that yields could actually go higher without BTC stakers? (As if that's how it'll play out.) They keep rewriting the tokenomics to suit themselves while only pretending to gather input. Dual stacking was originally the existing STX holders' own share, now simply handed to BTC stakers, and that too quietly slips by. They say they're "gathering your feedback" while not actually even looking at the negative opinions. I think the foundation's drive to deliver value to $STX holders has all but vanished, and I stopped adding to my position a long time ago. My tentative conclusion is that the Stacks entity barely thinks about STX value and treats STX as a money-printing press for BTC holders. The right move is to become a BTC holder and hold just enough STX to do dual stacking. Stacks-based alts can't even make it onto exchanges under the SIP-10 standard right now, so how exactly is BTC-L2 going to take over the world? And as I've said repeatedly, the Stacks side seems to want to keep only the positive shillers and basically won't engage with anyone who says anything negative. I've raised my voice a few times too, and since they don't seem inclined to listen, I've half given up. 4/ Conclusion My main investment thesis now: the scenario of "once BTC dominates the world someday, its flagship L2 STX network gets hugely active and accrues value!" is all but gone. Instead, STX has shifted in character to a BTC-yield printing press that sits beside Bitcoin: "When BTC hits $1B, everyone who wants yield on it has to buy ~5% STX, and the price rises in proportion!" (And if the network ultimately fails to activate, the end of this yield game will just be revealed as churning out mud cookies.) So there's no need to go all-in on STX in a portfolio. It's become an asset to play with at just ~5% against BTC, maybe 10% if you're really greedy. The truly bullish case is that everyone rushes to BTC-stake, more BTC than Stacks' entire market cap flows in, everyone tries to lock 5%, and a supply shock hits. (Though in that case, since you only need a small amount of STX to qualify for the 5% yield condition, supply actually loosens back into the market.) One way or another, it's become an asset that moves in proportion to Bitcoin's market cap, just with a somewhat larger swing. But if that's the case, rather than holding STX (which keeps getting minted) through that volatility risk, you may as well just hold Bitcoin, and keep just ~5% in Stacks to collect yield. My original investment thesis was, "Wow, if that rock-like Bitcoin becomes a usable network, what would that be worth?" The path it's on now has diverged a long way from that. Finally, I'll attach a Muneeb tweet. Unlike my view, Muneeb thinks that when the next bull cycle comes, BTC goes 3–4x and Stacks, as a Bitcoin bond, could go 20–50x. I think @muneeb should have spoken up like this much sooner. If you're going to add to STX, the time to do it is when voices reframing STX as a Bitcoin-protocol bond start drawing market attention again. Until then, ~5% against BTC is the ideal portfolio weight. If you already hold a lot of STX, or you're thinking about entering fresh, I hope you'll chew over my view one more time. (Not investment advice, of course.)
23
7
54
5,214
보타닉스 서비스 종료 입장문 1. 비트코인 L2 시대는 올거라고 생각하지만, 아직도 시장 논의는 그 앞에 머물러 있다. 2. 우리는 진짜 지분같은 형태의 토큰을 내고자 했는데, 시장 적합성이 없다고 판단했다. 3. wBTC는 이미 그 사용성을 입증한 것 같다. 성숙하고 범용적인 래핑 코인과 L2는 더 저렴하고 편리한 대안으로 자리잡은 모습을 보이고 있다. 4. 탈중앙화를 여전히 믿지만, 현재 온체인 성장의 방향은 하이퍼리퀴드나 로빈후드같은 주요 CEX로 향하고 있다. 5. 우리는 토큰이 아닌 실제 트랜잭션 볼륨을 기반으로 매출을 내야한다고 생각했지만, 거기까지 도달하지는 못했다. 6. 7/9일까지 반드시 자산 인출해라 또 하나의 비트코인 L2가 문을 내립니다.. 개인적으로는 끝까지 토큰 안찍고 그냥 문 닫는 결정 내리기가 쉽지 않았을텐데, 그 결단을 한 팀에게도 박수쳐주고 싶고 한편으로는 보타닉스는 만들어 가던게 많았다고 생각해서 아쉽기도 하네요.. 보타닉스는 에이스가 아니있습니다! 하고 넘어가기에는 토큰 안찍고 그냥 조용히 간다고 하니까 괜히 떠나는 모습을 응원하게 되네.. 🥲
It is with a heavy heart that we announce we are winding down the Botanix network. This decision is the hardest one we have made in four years, and we want to share the reasoning openly because the people who backed us, built with us, and used what we shipped deserve more than a quiet shutdown notice. First off, an immediate practical consideration for the Botanix community: please withdraw your Bitcoin and other assets before July 9th, 2026. When we started in 2022, the pitch was simple enough to say in a sentence: bring real utility to Bitcoin. What that actually meant in practice, and what we have spent nearly four years building toward, was more ambitious than that sentence made it sound. We were trying to build a Bitcoin-based blockchain that could find genuine product-market fit as a platform for Bitcoin applications, without using token incentives to drive growth, manufacture users, or simulate utility. Almost every chain that has launched in the last cycle has reached for the same playbook (issue a token without PMF, engineer the incentive surface, point at the resulting metrics), and we did not believe this route is a viable strategy in the long term. We wanted to know whether a Bitcoin chain could earn its users on the strength of what was built on top of it, the value it brings in the market with Bitcoin itself as the only meaningful economic primitive in the system. And we built it. The Spiderchain went live and stayed live, a year of mainnet operation with one hundred percent uptime and zero security incidents on a genuinely novel cryptographic architecture. We built Dynafed, a dynamic federation that turned the Spiderchain from a static multisig set into a rotating, decentralized one, the technical milestone that most people in this space said could not be built on Bitcoin without compromising trust assumptions. Twenty-five million transactions, two hundred thousand wallets, and tens of millions of dollars in assets moved across the chain, every single number of that earned organically without a token, without airdrops, without points programs, or any of the manufactured-demand machinery. Chainlink, Morpho, GMX, Dolomite, Fireblocks, Alchemy, Galaxy, OKX Wallet, all integrated. We shipped a Bitcoin neobank with BINK on iOS and Android, with self-custodial email login for Bitcoin (something that had never existed before), native Bitcoin yield, and the lowest borrowing rates against Bitcoin anywhere in the world, all of it downstream of owning the infrastructure. The point of saying this is not to argue with our own conclusion. The protocol works, the product works, and our team and ecosystem worked in concert to do exceptional work. We have run this experiment in earnest, with a working protocol, real applications, and a serious team, for over a year on mainnet and nearly four years in total. The honest answer we have arrived at, after living inside it every day, is that it did not work, at least not in this market and not on this timeline. We want to share what we think we learned, with the caveat that some of this is conviction and some of this is still suspicion, and we would rather be transparent about the difference than pretend to have clarity we do not have. The first thing I've had to sit with is timing. Bitcoin utility, making Bitcoin programmable, productive, and integrated into real financial activity, isn't where the real world users sit right now. The conversation is still on Bitcoin as a reserve asset, on its monetary and political positioning, on base-layer conservatism. Those questions are upstream of the ones a Bitcoin L2 needs people to be asking. I still believe Bitcoin gets there, but belief in the destination is not the same as being able to predict when, and nobody can. It's also possible the destination never materialises at all, and that Bitcoin's role as a reserve asset is simply where it settles. If that's true, there will never be a market for what we were building, and no amount of time or capital would change that. The second is the token question. We intended to eventually launch a token. We saw it, and still see it, as a genuinely new form of equity, something closer to an IPO than an airdrop, to be done when you reach product market fit and the moment is right. That moment never came. What became clear over the last year is that the market largely stopped rewarding even the more considered versions of that playbook. Token launches across the board have broadly underperformed, and those that did go to market with tokens haven't seen the outcomes or PMF that the model is supposed to produce. The third lesson is about where DeFi demand on Bitcoin actually lives. For most use cases that exist today, lending, yield, leveraged exposure, WBTC on a mature general-purpose L2 is genuinely sufficient. Users have voted with their behaviour, and the verdict is that the trust assumptions of a wrapped representation on Ethereum are acceptable to almost everyone who wants Bitcoin-denominated DeFi. Decentralisation matters to people in principle and in conversation; in practice, when something cheaper and easier is in front of them, they use it. The security case for a dedicated Bitcoin L2 is real, but it only matters for a narrower band of applications than our thesis required, one of the clearer lessons this market has taught us. The fourth lesson is structural. The on-chain economy is consolidating around venues that own the user relationship: Hyperliquid, Robinhood, the major CEXes, and now TradFi participants absorbing an ever-larger share of attention, flow, and revenue. Convenience and institutional credibility win, every time, as soon as they're available. As retail participation thins, that concentration only deepens. We were, and still are, believers in decentralisation, but the current direction of on-chain growth is running through distribution, and any team building base-layer infrastructure today is rowing upstream against that current. We were no exception. The fifth lesson is the most concrete. Both of the above played out directly in our economics. The users we attracted were primarily using Bitcoin as a store of value for yield, a legitimate use case, but not the high-frequency transaction volume that drives fee revenue on a network like ours. BINK was our answer to that: a Bitcoin neobank designed to bring daily usage of BTC and stablecoins on-chain, driving the transaction volume the network needed. It was the right strategic instinct, and one we never got the chance to fully test. BINK only landed on both app stores in the last few weeks, a product that by its nature could only be built once the underlying infrastructure was proven and live. When users choose the convenient option and economic gravity pulls toward distribution, what's left on a decentralised infrastructure layer is a user base that costs more to serve than it generates. Infrastructure costs are what they are, and the fee income never came close to covering them. If you would like to see how we were imagining a Bitcoin future and what we have been working on since September, feel free to download BINK and give it a spin: it’s a full-fledged self-custodial Bitcoin Neobank with email login, one click borrowing, a Lightning integration and more. App store: apps.apple.com/us/app/bink-b… Play store: play.google.com/store/apps/d… This UX is where we think Bitcoin is ultimately heading towards although it feels too early. You can use invite code 1SD31R, but remember to remove your funds by July 9th. We could keep going. We have chosen not to, however, because continuing past the point where additional time stops producing additional learning is not conviction, it is something that looks like conviction from the outside while corroding into something else on the inside. We would rather stop now, with integrity intact and resources available to take care of the people who took a chance on us, than push the experiment past the point where it still has something to teach us. Reminder: Please withdraw all your assets by July 9th. After this, the federation will sweep the remaining Bitcoin. Any other assets or tokens on the network from then onwards will unfortunately be unrecoverable. After this, the federation will sweep the remaining Bitcoin. Any other assets or tokens on the network from then onwards will unfortunately be unrecoverable. To our investors, who backed a thesis that was harder to defend than it should have been, to our partners who built alongside us and bet pieces of their own roadmaps on ours, to the developers who deployed on Spiderchain, to our users and the BINK community who showed up for something experimental and stayed, and most of all to the Botanix team who shipped a genuinely novel system with rigour and care and who made every hard day worth the difficulty: Thank you, more than the words available here can carry.
4
2
12
1,903
Succeeding You Father.. @ZestProtocol just Surpassed $STX FDV 🔥🔥🔥
3
7
47
2,092
Moneystack.ip | DeSpread (theo/acc) retweeted
최고 화제, 스트래티지 매도 마켓 사건 정리 스트래티지가 분명히 5/31일에 BTC를 매도했다고 6/1일에 공시했고, 이에 많은 폴리마켓 트레이더들이 Yes를 구매했지만, 돌연 폴리마켓은 "마켓 기간 밖에서 이뤄진 확인은 인정되지 않는다" 라는 규칙을 갑자기 추가하며 이 마켓을 No로 정산했습니다. 이에 트레이더들, 더 나아가 해당 이벤트에 참여하지 않은 유저들도 '원래 규칙에 없던 기준을, 결과가 나온 뒤에 끼워넣었다'는 이유로 분노하기 시작했습니다. 현재 X는 @willo2_Poly@0xDinoCrypto 를 중심으로 #StopPolyScam 해시태그와 함께 폴리마켓을 향한 거센 비판이 이어지고 있습니다. 과연 이 논란은 이대로 끝나게 될까요? 논란의 이 사건을 시간 순서대로 정리해봅니다.
1
3
11
651
Why are you even telling us this if you're going to increase STX block rewards every time you decide more STX is needed? If you're going to come back in a year saying you need more, and then again two years later saying the same thing, what's the point of having any standards at all? At that point, why not just issue 10,000 STX per block and promise a 30% annual yield? If this gets changed again, who is supposed to have any confidence in the token supply? I've lost count of how many times the tokenomics have been modified over the past two years. I expect even more changes over the next two. One of the main reasons I reluctantly supported SIP-031 was because it was presented as, "Let's make this adjustment now so we don't have to keep coming back and asking for more STX in the future." Now I honestly have no idea what the plan is anymore. And while people will say that community feedback will be taken into consideration, the reality is that this ecosystem rarely engages with feedback that disagrees with its preferred direction. I suspect this repost will be treated the same way.
Excited to be sharing the first draft of the PoX-5 SIP, the proposal that introduces Bitcoin Staking to Stacks. We invite feedback from the community and core contributors before it moves to a ratification vote. Read the draft and share your thoughts: forum.stacks.org/t/introduci…
8
6
40
3,099
디파이 앱 행사 후기 👍 지난 목요일, 요즘 같은 장에 무려 30k의 상금을 걸고 진행된 오프라인 이벤트가 성황리에 종료되었습니다. 다들 집중 잘되는 어둑어둑한 공간에 모여서 단체로 1,000x 트레이딩을 조져버리니까 현장이 도파민으로 가득찼던 거 같아요 ㅋㅋ 또 배경으로 틀어주던 영상도 한창 불장때 느낌을 나게 해줘서 너무 좋았어요. 저는 그냥 사람들 모아서 발표 듣고 가는 밋업보다는, 굳이 상금이 크지 않더라도 이렇게 제품 나왔을때 사람들 모아서 직접 제품 사용해보게 하고, 또 유저들이 함께 참여할 수 있는 장치를 함께 마련해주는 행사들이 참 좋은 것 같습니다. 행사에도 신경 많이 쓴게 느껴졌던 요근래 잘 없던 행사였다 @defiapp 땡큐!
어제 @DefiApp_KR 밋업 진행 봤습니다. 가히 최고 수준의 밋업이었다고 할만 함. 3시간 가량 행사, 100명 입장에 상금이 1500만원, 750만원, 500만원 이런 식인데 웹2에서 이런 진입장벽 낮은 엄청난 상금 대회 있었으면 승인 경쟁률 2천대 1 이었을듯. 그 외에도 눈에 띄던게 각 벽면의 화면. 밈을 굉장히 잘 아는 것 같아서 인상 깊었습니다. 그래 파티는 이래야지. @0xtkyeo 님의 기획력에 감탄 마이하고 갑니다
1
8
741
Moneystack.ip | DeSpread (theo/acc) retweeted

4
6
17
630
Me too! I also have the strongest conviction in Bitcoin, specifically BTCFi backed by Bitcoin, and I’m always thinking about how to effectively pitch this to users. However, what I find challenging is assessing actual institutional demand and understanding the exact conversations top-tier builders like tycho having with institutions. Chatting with him provides so many clues regarding this, which makes our conversations so enjoyable. In particular, I have high expectations for @ZestProtocol’s upcoming Bitcoin-backed vault model. Once it launches, it will be the most ideal BTC-backed lending model I’ve envisioned. Looking forward to keeping the conversation going whenever there's a chance!
Always a pleasure to chat with @MoneyStack9. The Korean community reads BTCFi faster than most other markets. Part 2 on Zest Protocol's 10-year thesis.
1
3
25
1,537
제스트($ZEST)에 관한 재밌는 사실 하이라이트 1/ 팀 드레이퍼는 놀랍게도, 저희에게 항상 가장 열정적으로 피드백을 제공하고 있습니다. 2/ 제스트는 1년 뒤 기관 채택을 시작으로, 10년 후에는 비트코인 금융 시스템에 접근하는 핵심 인터페이스가 되어 있을 겁니다. - 동양은 @yzilabs , 서양에서는 @DraperVC - 가장 열정적으로 소통하는 지지자, 팀 드레이퍼의 든든함 - 새롭게 이야기되는 AI 공격과 보안, 클래리티는 더 위험한가 or 덜 위험한가? - 이미 수요를 충분히 확인한 제품을 출시한다는 것 - 기관 채택에는 스택스 같은 지속적 레거시 역시 매우 중요하다 - @ZestProtocol 의 10년 뒤 미래는? 제스트와의 2부 인터뷰를 공개합니다. 2부는 제스트 그 자체에 집중했으며, 이번에도 여러 분들이 궁금해할만한 질문들로만 구성되어 있습니다. 이번에도 알찬 질문들로만 가득 채워봤습니다. 최근 알파 종목중에서도 분명 뛰어난 퍼포먼스를 보여주고 있는 제스트, 과연 제스트는 그들이 생각하는 10년뒤 비전까지 도달할 수 있을까요?
3
5
48
7,013
무려 3만불 프리롤, Defi App 로켓 이벤트! 총 100명이 3만불 상금을 걸고 진행하는 이벤트가 있다면 믿어주겠니..👀 바로 @DefiApp_KR 에서 진행하는 로켓 프리롤 이벤트입니다! 디파이앱에서 요번에 도파민 개터지는 기능을 내놨는데, 위 영상처럼 1000x 레버리지를 끼고 로켓 게임을 하는 기능입니다. 실제 돈 아닌 테스트 머니로도 진행해보실 수 있어요! 요 기능을 사용해보시고, 사용 후기 & 피드백 & 개쩌는 역대급 기록 달성 등을 포스팅하신 후 루마 등록을 진행하시면, 총 100명을 최종 선발해 $30,000 상금을 건 토너먼트를 진행하게 됩니다. 당첨만 된다면 공짜인데다가, 인당 $300이라는 기대값을 갖고 있는 이벤트인 것이에요.. 거기에 장소도 압구정 프리미엄 라운지바라서 먹을 거도 낭낭하지 않을까.. 이 이벤트 추첨은 오늘 마감!! 5/28(목)에 시간이 괜찮으시다면, 부지런히 많이 사용해보시고 녹화 후 포스팅을 통한 참가 티켓 확보에 도전해보시죠!
5
235
Q. 현재 스택스 생태계를 10점 만점으로 점수를 매긴다면? A. 저는 8점 정도라고 할 수 있을 것 같아요 지난주 수요일, 제스트 프로토콜(@ZestProtocol) 파운더 타이코(@TychoOnnasch)와 인터뷰를 진행했습니다. 1부는 제스트보다는 스택스 생태계에 위주로 집중한 인터뷰였으며, 그의 생각을 엿볼 수 있습니다. 하락장이 찾아오며 많은 한국 커뮤니티원들이 스택스의 비전에 대해 궁금증을 갖고 있었고, 저 역시도 그러했기에 아래와 같이 질문했습니다. 💡 질문 목록 - 스택스 외에도 다른 레이어들이 약진하고 있는데, 스택스는 여전히 강점을 갖는가? - 스택스 랩스의 감원, CMO 채용 지연 등에서 사람들이 답답함을 느껴하고 있는데 이에 대한 생각은? - 기관들은 실제로 스택스에 대한 관심,수요를 갖고 있는가? - 듀얼 스테이킹이 스택스 생태계에 어떤 긍정적인 영향을 미치는가? - 스택스 생태계 외 비트코인 생태계에 대해 관심을 가져야 하는 부분이 있다면? $ZEST 토큰 정책 공개 이전에 이 영상이 촬영되어 에어드랍 스킴에 대해 적극적으로 질문하지 못한 점, 아무래도 리테일로써 스택스 생태계에 듀얼 스테이킹이 미칠 영향보다는 보다 직접적으로 $STX에 미칠 영향을 집중적으로 물어보지 못한 것이 아쉽기도 했지만(만약 이걸 보는 직접 이해관계자가 있다면 댓글로 적극적으로 소통해주면 좋겠습니다) 전반적으로 흥미로운 부분이 많은 인터뷰였습니다. 아직 스택스 생태계에 관심을 갖고 있다면 생태계 최전선 빌더로 있는 타이코와의 인터뷰에서 얻어갈 인사이트가 꽤 있다고 생각합니다.
3
4
28
4,618
주피터 이상한거 함 ㅋㅋ 포커 스테이킹 기능 출시 주피터에서 Jup poker라고, 이상한 기능을 내놨습니다. 이른바 포커의 '스테이킹' 이라는 개념을 블록체인으로 가져온건데요. 포커를 잘하는 사람의 지분을 사고, 만약 그 사람이 상금을 얻으면 그 상금을 나눠갖는 구조인데요. 참가비를 대신 내주고, 그 비용만큼 나눠갖는 구조라고 생각하면 됩니다 ㅋㅋ 여성 포커 프로 중 탑급인 Xuan Liu, 브레이슬릿 위너 Danny Tang이 지분을 팔고 있어요. 사실 이 포커 지분 파는 사이트는 이미 유명한 곳이 있는데, 그거보다 블록체인 사용하는 게 더 좋아보이기는 합니다. 포커 관심있으신 분들은 한번 구경해보세요! 나도 Xian Liu 누님 100불만 스떼끼 해볼까..
3
6
678
10년뒤 시트리아, 지배적인 비트코인 L2가 될까? [시트리아 인터뷰 2부] - 왜 파운더스 펀드는 시트리아의 비전에 가장 공감했는가? - 시트리아 생태계는 유동성을 끌어올 능력이 있다. - 10년 후의 시트리아는 어떤 모습일까? 지난 1부 영상에 이어 2부는 @0x_orkun 과 함께 보다 @citrea_xyz 에 집중한 인터뷰를 진행했습니다. 개인적으로 지금 비트코인 생태계에 가장 필요한 건 충분한 유동성이라 느끼는데, 그 부분에 대한 시트리아의 생각을 들어볼 수 있어 매우 좋은 기회였다고 생각합니다. 한국에서도 꼭 좋은 성과 내기를!
4
8
53
4,354
답답한 비트코인 생태계.. 진짜 다 물어봤습니다 (시트리아 인터뷰 with CEO @0x_orkun) - 이제 비트코인 생태계는 .. 활력을 잃어버린 것이 아닌가? - 과연 비트코인 에코시스템에 전성기는 다시 올 수 있을까? - 비트코인은 개인의 손을 떠나, 기관의 손에 재편되고 있는가? - 양자 컴퓨터 도입 이후의 비트코인 생태계는? 많은 분들이 아시다시피, 저는 ‘비트코인 활용’ 맥시인데, 최근 장세도 그렇고, 점차 비트코인 생태계의 힘이 빠져가는 것을 보며 개인적으로도 쉽지 않은 시간을 겪었었습니다. 하지만, 시트리아(@citrea_xyz, @CitreaKorea )라는 큰 비트코인 생태계를 직접 이끌어가고 있는 orkun과의 인터뷰를 통해 많은 답답함을 해소할 수 있었습니다. 비트코인에 관심이 있었던 분이라면, 꼭 한번 시청하시기를 추천합니다!
5
2
26
1,815
레전드 adhd가 일하는 법 👽 야밤에 일하다가 갑자기 문득 내 꼴이 웃기다는 생각에 찍었습니다 ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ 왼쪽에는 노트북 열어놓고.. 리클라이너 위에 앉아서 미용실 쿠션 올리고 한쪽에는 프로레슬링 켜놓고 뚜닥뚜닥 중.. 이번주는 옵시디언 활용한 llm 위키를 구축해보는 시도중입니다 진짜 세상이 너무 빨리 변하는데 한편으론 재밌기도 하고 무섭기도하고.. 진짜 살아온 이래 제일 다이나믹한 순간인듯
8
379