[{"content":"Bitcoin continues to pull back toward $76k, with the market waiting for tonight\u0026rsquo;s US CPI print. The threat quantum computing poses to Bitcoin — a sword that has hung overhead for a long time — has seen some fresh movement.\nA Sword Hanging Overhead The signature security of Bitcoin and Ethereum rests on elliptic curve cryptography. The private key you use to send a transaction corresponds to a public key that is broadcast on-chain. To steal coins, an attacker must derive the private key from the public key. This problem is known as the elliptic curve discrete logarithm problem, and classical computers solve it so slowly that it is hopeless — requiring more time than the age of the universe.\nIn 1994, mathematician Peter Shor proposed a quantum algorithm that can solve such problems in polynomial time. In other words, once a sufficiently powerful quantum computer exists, deriving the private key from the public key, forging signatures, and emptying wallets becomes nothing more than running a program. The industry calls the day a quantum computer truly gains this capability Q-Day.\nWhen Q-Day arrives is still undecided. But one question can be worked out clearly right now: exactly how many resources does a single run of Shor\u0026rsquo;s algorithm require?\nA Public Sword-Sharpening Contest At the end of May this year, Eigen Labs launched a public challenge called ECDSA.Fail. More than a hundred participants had one task: design quantum circuits for the secp256k1 curve — the very curve used for Bitcoin and Ethereum signatures.[1]\nA quantum circuit is the gate-level implementation of Shor\u0026rsquo;s algorithm. To run Shor on a real quantum computer, it must first be compiled into a circuit built from individual quantum gates. The single most resource-hungry bottleneck across the whole pipeline is the elliptic curve point-addition operation. Because Shor\u0026rsquo;s attack on the discrete logarithm centers on computing point multiplication — which in turn is composed of vast amounts of point addition and doubling — these reversible arithmetic circuits consume the overwhelming majority of qubits and gate resources. Point addition is the blade of the sword.\nThe challenge scored every circuit with the same formula: peak logical qubit count, multiplied by the average number of Toffoli gates executed. The former is the error-corrected qubit scale; the latter is an expensive and hard-to-prepare quantum operation. Their product is a composite measure of resources.\nBy the data cutoff on July 26, participants had driven this score down from 1.075 billion to 149.6 million — an 86.1% reduction. The best circuit used 1,151 logical qubits with roughly 1.3 million Toffoli gates. The paper notes this result sits more than half below the point-addition threshold previously published by Google Quantum AI, while also stating that the two sides used different counting methodologies and cannot be directly compared.[1]\nAI Empowerment One striking aspect of this challenge was the involvement of AI.\nFirst, the sharpeners. The paper\u0026rsquo;s author list includes names familiar to the crypto world — Eigen Labs, the Ethereum Foundation, StarkWare, Trail of Bits, and the Ethereum Foundation\u0026rsquo;s Justin Drake.[1] Most of those honing the blade are crypto-industry insiders. The motive is simple: to know how soon the enemy\u0026rsquo;s sword can be forged, the best method is to first draw the blueprint for the enemy. Only by calculating the cost of an attack clearly does a defense timeline become meaningful.\nSecond, the tools for honing it. The paper names this practice \u0026ldquo;open automated research\u0026rdquo;: participants, together with AI agents, iteratively generate, implement, test, and share candidate improvements, with validators acting as gatekeepers and a public leaderboard driving the race.[1] AI\u0026rsquo;s role here is as an accelerator of the research process, multiplying the efficiency of the search for better circuits. In other words, what shaved off those 86% was not just over a hundred people, but also a tireless army of AI assistants.\nA Bucket of Cold Water Do not rush to excitement or to fear. Four points:\nFirst, the challenge measured only the single link of point addition, not a complete attack. The paper additionally constructed a version compatible with windowing methods, using 1,162 qubits and roughly 1.68 million Toffoli gates, with a measured success rate of about 99.81% — but the authors themselves state this belongs to a single-call sensitivity model, not an estimate of the full Shor algorithm\u0026rsquo;s success rate. A real attack requires repeated calls, at a cost far exceeding this.\nSecond, in the benchmark there is a summand supplied classically; the interface alignment for a complete attack is still under discussion.\nThird, comparisons with Google\u0026rsquo;s numbers involve differing methodologies. The paper itself is very restrained, acknowledging only that its figure is lower, without claiming a formal surpassing.\nFourth, and most important: all of this still remains at the level of algorithm and circuit resource estimation. It has not broken any private key, nor has it built a quantum computer that can actually run. Between the on-paper resources and Q-Day lies the chasm of an entire hardware-engineering effort — and even the laws of physics.\nWhy Pay Attention Now Because migration is a slow undertaking, and the timeline is already counting down.\nThe US National Institute of Standards and Technology\u0026rsquo;s NIST IR 8547 draft proposes gradually phasing out 112-bit security-level classical public-key algorithms after 2030, and prohibiting them after 2035. Ethereum has set December 2029 as a self-imposed deadline for implementing quantum resistance at the base layer. On the Bitcoin side, discussions around BIP-360 and BIP-361 have clearly accelerated this year; the latter plans a phased migration away from ECDSA and Schnorr signatures.[3] The US Department of Commerce has just finalized grants of up to $100 million each to Rigetti, D-Wave, and Quantinuum, while taking minority stakes in all three.[3] Galaxy Digital has pledged up to $5 million for related research, and nine institutions including BlackRock, Coinbase, and Strategy have jointly committed $15 million over three years to Bitcoin security research, including post-quantum defenses.[2]\nAnd then there is that unavoidable number: millions of bitcoins sit in addresses whose public keys are already exposed, an estimated ~1 million of them belonging to Satoshi.[3] Migrating these coins is trickier than migrating any other asset.\nAlways Be Prepared Stances toward the quantum question easily fall into two extremes. One is alarmism — declaring every drop in resource estimates to be the sword of Damocles falling tomorrow. The other is head-in-the-sand denial — assuming Q-Day is so far off it has nothing to do with us.\nBoth are unwise. The professional approach is to treat it as a long race: the sword is being slowly honed, and the shield must be repaired in advance. The technical pathways for post-quantum migration, the standards timeline, and ecosystem coordination — these tasks are already underway, and progressing not slowly. For holders, what is worth watching is not some scary percentage, but whether the entire ecosystem can get the new signature algorithms ready and arrange the migration of old addresses before the hardware catches up.\nThose who prepare in advance can face danger without fear, and remain calm and composed.\nReferences [1] Eigen Labs, \u0026ldquo;ECDSA.Fail\u0026rdquo; public challenge (May–July 2026) and its associated paper; participants include Eigen Labs, the Ethereum Foundation, StarkWare, Trail of Bits, and Justin Drake. [2] Galaxy Digital\u0026rsquo;s research pledge, and the joint nine-institution ($15M / three-year) Bitcoin security commitment (BlackRock, Coinbase, Strategy, et al.). [3] NIST IR 8547 draft; Bitcoin BIP-360 / BIP-361 discussions; US Department of Commerce awards to Rigetti, D-Wave, and Quantinuum. ","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/The-Quantum-Sword-Honed-by-AI.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eBitcoin continues to pull back toward $76k, with the market waiting for tonight\u0026rsquo;s US CPI print. The threat quantum computing poses to Bitcoin — a sword that has hung overhead for a long time — has seen some fresh movement.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"The Quantum Sword, Honed by AI"},{"content":"Bitcoin has been pulling back lately, with macro headwinds pushing it down to around $77k. A few days ago, something quietly unsettling happened on Liquid — Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s federated sidechain.\nAn Afternoon of Lost Coins At 14:06 UTC on September 6, a peg-out redemption request appeared on Liquid block 4,050,349, asking the federation to release 3,996.01834922 BTC to a brand-new Bitcoin address[2]. Twenty-two minutes later, on Bitcoin block 965,783, a transaction with 83 inputs was confirmed — signed by more than 11 of the federation\u0026rsquo;s 15 nodes[2]. That morning, the federation\u0026rsquo;s Bitcoin treasury held roughly 4,200 BTC; after the transaction, only 197 remained[2].\nThat evening, the receiving address left a message on the Bitcoin chain: \u0026ldquo;we are whitehats, contact us on chain,\u0026rdquo; and sent 1,000 satoshis to the federation\u0026rsquo;s address to make sure the message was seen[2]. A \u0026ldquo;white hat\u0026rdquo; usually refers to someone who finds a vulnerability and chooses to disclose it rather than exploit it maliciously. Of course, this was merely the attackers putting a halo on themselves.\nThe next day, the attackers returned about 3,400 BTC, but kept roughly 600. Perhaps they considered that their fee for providing \u0026ldquo;professional services\u0026rdquo;?\nThree Lines of Defense To understand what happened, you first need a rough grasp of how Liquid is designed.\nLiquid is a Bitcoin sidechain launched by Blockstream in 2018. You lock BTC into a federation address and receive L-BTC, which circulates on the sidechain — a new block every minute. To withdraw, you burn L-BTC to initiate a peg-out, and the federation sends BTC to your address.\nTo prevent anyone from stealing the keys, Liquid built three lines of defense: an 11-of-15 multisig, where 15 companies each hold one key and 11 are needed to move funds; a PAK whitelist — the Peg-out Authorization Key — that only pays to registered addresses, with any change taking three days; and HSM hardware modules that only sign whitelisted addresses[2].\nEach line was stricter than the last. Yet this time, all three waved it through normally. The federation\u0026rsquo;s PAK whitelist was not bypassed, nor were the other mechanisms — every signature was genuine[1][2].\nThe problem lies precisely here. Every check asked the same question: was this redemption properly authorized? No one asked whether the L-BTC that was burned was ever supposed to exist in the first place.\nThe answer lies further upstream. Elements, the underlying software of Liquid — an open-source fork based on Bitcoin Core — appears to have a flaw in its range-proof verification cache, which let a batch of L-BTC that should never have existed be treated as real by the chain\u0026rsquo;s consensus[3]. The coins came from nothing, yet when spent, they traveled through the most legitimate channel. Even SideSwap itself stated that these L-BTC came from a bug in Elements, not from SideSwap\u0026rsquo;s own system[2].\nIn other words, the ledger miscalculated itself, conjuring up a batch of blank notes out of thin air. On the treasury side, the seals, signatures, and addresses were all in perfect order, so it released the goods as listed. Real gold went out; what came back was a stack of tickets that had sprung from nowhere on the ledger.\nAs for the exact vulnerability in Elements, Blockstream has yet to disclose specific technical details[2].\nReal Gold and Blank Notes Compare BTC to gold, and L-BTC is a blank note. It is a negotiable instrument, a warehouse receipt that, in theory, can be redeemed at any time. The risk of paper gold is that the custodian issues more certificates than it has gold. This time, the hackers breached the note system, printed fake notes, and walked off with real gold.\nAs has been argued before: a system built on trust principles inevitably carries a trust-chain propagation problem — ultimately, a single small betrayal at the end of the chain is enough to collapse the whole thing.\nToday\u0026rsquo;s incident is another validation of the trust-chain principle. Except this time, what broke was the most hidden and least suspectable link in the chain — the correctness of the code.\nThe Peril of the Trust Chain What are you actually trusting when you hold L-BTC?\nYou must trust that Blockstream plays by the rules; trust that none of the 15 nodes lose their keys; trust that those HSM devices never malfunction; trust that the PAK whitelist is correctly designed; trust that SideSwap\u0026rsquo;s redemption service is honest; trust that the code in Elements has no bugs; trust that Liquid\u0026rsquo;s consensus rules always compute correctly; trust that none of the 80-plus federation members turn rogue; trust that if something goes wrong, someone will make it right and pay up; …\nA nine-link chain, each link connected to the next. If any single link collapses, you may lose everything.\nAnd BTC? You need trust no company, no institution, no person\u0026rsquo;s promise. Every node verifies independently, and a block that violates consensus is simply discarded. Satoshi said: don\u0026rsquo;t trust, verify. The object of your trust is not some specific person, but mathematics. Mathematics does not require your belief — you can compute it yourself.\nThis is the difference between real gold and a blank note. Real gold in your pocket requires trusting no one; a blank note demands trust from link one to link nine, and if even one link fails, the vault is empty.\nWhen Security Collapses Cross-chain bridges, sidechains, and wrapped assets have been hot topics in the industry for years. They let the underlying asset step out and participate in a wider world. Yet each step outward adds another link of trust. The longer the chain, the more links, the greater the probability of collapse.\nThis does not mean sidechains are necessarily bad. The price of convenience is trust, and that trade-off must be calculated clearly. You may opt for convenience, but you should know exactly what you are giving up. The most precious thing about BTC has never been merely its price, but the fact that you can verify it yourself, without surrendering your trust.\nThe length of the trust chain is the fundamental measure of an asset\u0026rsquo;s security. As for whether Liquid\u0026rsquo;s treasury will ever get back the remaining ~600 BTC, that depends on how the subsequent negotiations between Blockstream and the attackers unfold.\nStop staring only at bull and bear markets. First take a look at what\u0026rsquo;s in your hand — real gold, or a blank note?\nReferences [1] Liquid Network federation model — the 11-of-15 functionary multisig, the PAK (Peg-out Authorization Key) whitelist, and HSM-signed withdrawals. Incident analyses noting that all signatures were valid and no key was compromised. [2] On-chain evidence: Liquid block 4,050,349 (peg-out request for 3,996.01834922 BTC), Bitcoin block 965,783 (83-input transaction signed by 11+ of 15 federation nodes), the \u0026ldquo;we are whitehats\u0026rdquo; message and 1,000-sat return; plus SideSwap\u0026rsquo;s statement attributing the L-BTC to an Elements bug. [3] Elements — Blockstream\u0026rsquo;s open-source fork of Bitcoin Core — and its range-proof verification; a suspected cache flaw; Blockstream had not published specific technical details as of the article date. ","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/4000-BTC-Stolen-From-Liquid.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eBitcoin has been pulling back lately, with macro headwinds pushing it down to around $77k. A few days ago, something quietly unsettling happened on Liquid — Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s federated sidechain.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Fortress Guarded, Yet 4,000 BTC Stolen"},{"content":"A fascinating and wildly imaginative project has appeared recently: tapeout.net.\nPut simply, it lets users create their own integrated circuit on-chain.\nFrom Transistors to CPUs Before getting into the project, some background on logic circuits is in order.\nStrip the casing off any chip product we use today and keep decomposing it, layer by layer, and you will find that it is ultimately built from one most basic component.\nThat component is the transistor.\nWire transistors together in different circuits and you get slightly \u0026ldquo;higher-level\u0026rdquo; components — logic gates of every kind: AND gates, OR gates, and so on. Combine those gates into more complex circuits and you get still \u0026ldquo;higher-level\u0026rdquo; devices — units capable of computation: adders, multipliers, and so on.\nCombine those units further, layer upon layer, and you eventually arrive at the high-tech chips that seem so forbidding and mysterious today: GPUs, CPUs, and everything else.\nSo if you deconstruct a chip completely, it really contains just two elements:\none, the building block — the transistor;\nthe other, the way transistors are wired together — the circuit.\nTurning a Chip Into Tokens That is purely hardware engineering. What does any of it have to do with the crypto ecosystem?\nThat is precisely where tapeout\u0026rsquo;s creative spark lies:\nIt uses ERC-1155 tokens to play the role of \u0026ldquo;transistors,\u0026rdquo; and ERC-721 tokens to play the \u0026ldquo;circuits\u0026rdquo; that connect those transistors.\nIn this way, on the blockchain, we get \u0026ldquo;on-chain chips\u0026rdquo; that exist permanently and never stop running.\nIn a real product, transistors and circuits alone are not enough to bring a chip to life — they are just \u0026ldquo;dead\u0026rdquo; hardware. What is also needed is a clock frequency that generates a regular \u0026ldquo;heartbeat\u0026rdquo;: the prime mover that makes a chip actually run.\nBlockchain technology happens to provide exactly that clock frequency: the block produced at regular intervals fits naturally into the role of clock signal for this \u0026ldquo;on-chain chip.\u0026rdquo;\nSo the on-chain chip faithfully reproduces the operating logic and behavior of a real chip — and can keep running forever.\nThe project was first launched on the BNB Chain and is running now, with plenty of enthusiasts trying to mint \u0026ldquo;transistors\u0026rdquo; and design their own \u0026ldquo;chips.\u0026rdquo;\nWhy This Matters The details of the project, and the chips enthusiasts have designed with it, are freely available for readers to explore — they are not repeated here.\nBecause next to that information, the significance of the project itself is far greater.\nMeasured by clock frequency, by the functionality of today\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;chips,\u0026rdquo; and by any other dimension, the project is still extremely primitive and naive. But it has opened a door — a door to another world that no one had ever imagined existed: semiconductor chips can also be built on-chain.\nThe imagination and potential applications contained in that are probably beyond what we can picture today.\nTake chips alone.\nIn the AI era, chips are the physical brain of AI. We keep saying that AI must not become a monopoly tool for a handful of companies and organizations — that we must find ways to decentralize it and turn it into a public good for all humanity.\nThe crypto ecosystem has tried many approaches, yet none of them has carried as much significance as this project.\nEven if it fails in the future, the project will have offered a fresh vantage point and a fresh line of thinking: can we, on this basis, decentralize AI hardware, software, and compute?\nThe approaches worth trying in that direction, and the room to explore, are enormous.\nA Closing Thought This naturally recalls what Vitalik emphasized when Ethereum was first being promoted: Ethereum is a world computer that never stops.\nTimes have changed, and a genuinely never-stopping chip — which is, in effect, a tiny computer — has actually been built.\nReferences [1] tapeout.net — a project that lets users build integrated circuits on-chain: ERC-1155 tokens serve as \u0026ldquo;transistors\u0026rdquo; and ERC-721 tokens serve as the \u0026ldquo;circuits\u0026rdquo; connecting them; first launched and currently running on the BNB Chain. [2] The chip hierarchy described in the article: transistors → logic gates (AND, OR) → arithmetic units (adders, multipliers) → GPUs and CPUs. [3] The clock-frequency analogy: a blockchain\u0026rsquo;s regular block production acting as the clock signal that drives the on-chain chip, replacing the hardware clock a physical chip requires. [4] Vitalik Buterin\u0026rsquo;s early framing of Ethereum as a \u0026ldquo;world computer that never stops,\u0026rdquo; invoked in the closing; and the article\u0026rsquo;s argument that decentralized AI hardware is the project\u0026rsquo;s long-term significance. ","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/The-Birth-of-the-On-Chain-Chip.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eA fascinating and wildly imaginative project has appeared recently: tapeout.net.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePut simply, it lets users create their own integrated circuit on-chain.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2 id=\"from-transistors-to-cpus\"\u003eFrom Transistors to CPUs\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore getting into the project, some background on logic circuits is in order.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eStrip the casing off any chip product we use today and keep decomposing it, layer by layer, and you will find that it is ultimately built from one most basic component.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThat component is the transistor.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"The Birth of the On-Chain Chip"},{"content":"Last week, right after the official release of DeepSeek V4 Pro, they threw out something else called DeepSeek Harness. Its GitHub stars shot to 37,000 in three days. My first reaction was: DeepSeek is finally shipping its own Agent? I installed the developer preview immediately.\nOnce it was installed, I was lost — this was nothing like what I imagined an Agent to be. There is no chat box where you say \u0026ldquo;write me a crawler.\u0026rdquo; Instead there is an empty workspace and a long list of plugins I could not make sense of. For a moment I suspected I had installed the wrong thing.\nSo I went through the official site, the developer docs, and that 88-page paper, then spent three days installing five or six plugins and poking at it. Only then did I understand what DeepSeek is actually after. In one sentence: what they built is not an Agent product at all — it is a chassis that lets an Agent plug capabilities in and out by itself. Here is how I came to see it.\nI. First, the Formula: Agent = Model + Harness To understand DeepSeek Harness, you have to accept one formula: Agent = Model + Harness.\nModel is easy — it is the large model itself. Harness is everything wrapped around it: tool calling, Skills, session management, sandboxing, storage, the agent loop, sub-agents, workflows. Every Agent product you have used is essentially a Harness wearing a shell.\nHistorically, vendors sealed those shells shut. Use Codex and what tools you get, what you cannot change — all decided for you. At best you install a few MCP servers and Skills; the rest you cannot touch.\nDeepSeek Harness runs the other way: it takes the shell apart and turns everything inside into plugins. Even the WebUI itself is just a UI plugin — think it is ugly, swap it out whenever you like. Some users have already published skin plugins for it.\nThe official phrase for this \u0026ldquo;everything is pluggable\u0026rdquo; philosophy is five words: everything is a plugin.\nMy first hands-on impression was that it felt exactly like the modular phones I played with as a kid, where you could pop out the battery, camera and speaker and swap in your own. DeepSeek Harness has moved that game onto Agents.\nThe only genuinely irreplaceable core in the whole system is a kernel called Cordis, responsible for nothing but loading, unloading and dependency management of plugins. Its author has joined DeepSeek, and this release also ships an 88-page paper[2].\nTwo properties of the kernel are particularly well thought out:\nTemporal composability — after a plugin is unloaded, can the side effects it produced be fully undone? If not, the Agent\u0026rsquo;s state gets dirty as it runs.\nSpatial composability — plugins depend on each other; when another plugin appears, disappears or is replaced, can a plugin dynamically re-resolve its own dependencies?\nOnly with these two properties can an Agent keep installing, uninstalling and even writing new plugins for itself while running, creating something like self-evolution. The headroom in that mechanism is, honestly, pretty wild.\nII. Four Modes — My Advice Is Not to Overthink Them This is where ordinary users get lost most easily. Open the home page and four modes are staring at you: Standard, PTC, Minimal, Creative. At first I assumed these were four capability tiers and agonized over which to pick.\nThen it clicked: they are just four template presets, there to get you running out of the box. Once you understand the kernel, this layer barely matters.\nStandard: full code-agent capability — file read/write, shell, search, Skills, planning, sub-agents, all of it, ready to go. If it is your first time, pick this one without thinking.\nPTC: this one is interesting. It hands the model an SDK and lets the model write TypeScript directly, packing multiple tool operations into a single run_code execution. What used to take five model round-trips of reading, searching, filtering and parallel calls gets done in one program execution, saving tokens. The cost is that debugging gets harder and it demands solid code-planning ability from the model.\nI got burned here once. Eagerly, I had the model write a batch file-processing program in PTC mode; it hardcoded the paths in TypeScript and the thing errored halfway through. I spent ages fixing it before realizing it was a path-concatenation bug — nothing to do with the mode, just my own overconfidence. Beginners really should not touch this; Standard is enough.\nMinimal: only two tools — a persistent Bash and a file editor — with a system prompt fixed to the single line \u0026ldquo;You are a helpful software engineering assistant.\u0026rdquo; This mode is not for daily use; it exists to run bare-Agent capability benchmarks. Want to compare the true level of two models? Use it. Use it daily and you will lose your mind.\nCreative: the most distinctive part of the whole product. It lets the Agent inspect the Cordis environment running inside itself, experiment with plugins in memory, then build plugins and install them onto itself.\nI told it: \u0026ldquo;Make me a mode that is read-only for code, cannot modify files, and is dedicated to security auditing.\u0026rdquo; It checked what it was missing, wrote a plugin on the spot, installed it — and then genuinely went read-only.\nIt is like an Agent that, halfway through a job, discovers it has no wrench, forges one on the spot, and plugs it into its own hand to keep working. That moment of bootstrapping is, to me, the most valuable thing about DeepSeek Harness.\nIII. An Official Product That Does Not Lock You to Its Own Model Modes aside, let us talk price. This is probably the first thing that scares ordinary users off.\nDeepSeek announced a price increase, and the increase is steep. V4 Pro\u0026rsquo;s cache-hit price went up 12x, and peak output pricing came to ¥27. I had predicted roughly a 2x rise; instead peak starts at 3x and cache hits are a flat 12x. Compared against GLM and Qwen 3.8 Max, the gap has all but closed — and with GLM-5.3 about to launch, likely another open-source SOTA at unchanged price, V4 Pro may genuinely lose on API cost-performance[3].\nBut here is the interesting part: DeepSeek Harness does not lock you into DeepSeek models. It supports adding model providers from a directory, and also custom providers with your own Base URL, protocol and model list. In other words, you can run GLM — or any other vendor\u0026rsquo;s model — inside DeepSeek Harness.\nAn official Agent product that openly lets you plug in someone else\u0026rsquo;s model is a counterintuitive design. But it fits their \u0026ldquo;building infrastructure\u0026rdquo; positioning: the model is a plugin, tools are plugins, anything can be a plugin. The model itself is only one link in the ecosystem.\nIV. An Underappreciated Design: Sessions as Append-Only Event Logs One more point that is easy to overlook but that I think matters a lot: a DeepSeek Harness session is an append-only event log.\nThe system prompt the model sees, user messages, reasoning traces, tool calls and their results, permission changes, context compression, sub-agent dispatch — all of it is written into the log as events. The history the model sees on the next turn is re-derived from that log.\nWhat does that mean in practice? When an Agent crashes, you used to get four words — \u0026ldquo;task failed\u0026rdquo; — with no clue which step it went off the rails. In Harness, the trajectory view lets you replay each run by source: observable, auditable, reproducible. For anyone doing Agent research, that is close to essential.\nV. Plugins Worth Installing The community plugin directory went live alongside it. I installed a few and these are the ones I think are worth it:\ndsh-at-file: type @ in the input box to reference a file. Saves a lot of hassle. dsh-genui: lets the model render charts, tables, diffs and Mermaid diagrams directly in its replies. dsh-automation: adds automation capabilities. Needed, though the interaction is a bit rough. DSH-better-sidebar: a VS Code–style workbench — file management, terminal, Git and diff all packed into the sidebar. ModLens: gives text-only models vision; paste an image and it can read it. Installing takes one command:\nnpx @deepseek-ai/dsh web If none of that means anything to you, just hand the command to any local Agent you have and let it install things for you. Once it is done, open the local address in your browser, drop in your DeepSeek API key, and you are running. Official site: https://www.deepseek.com/harness/[1]\nClosing Thoughts DeepSeek Harness is a very unusual system. I like the \u0026ldquo;everything is a plugin\u0026rdquo; philosophy, I read the Cordis paper, and the design is genuinely considered. But as a product, it is deeply unfriendly to ordinary users — too much developer jargon, too high a barrier, too few features, too rough an experience. Every step pushes normal people away.\nBut DeepSeek probably never built it for \u0026ldquo;normal people.\u0026rdquo; What they want is developers worldwide coming in, writing plugins for this chassis, turning it into an ecosystem. Much like their slogan: explore the unknown.\nMy recommendation: if you just want an Agent that gets work done, use Standard mode and stop fiddling. If you are someone who likes to tinker, install it and play — you will see a very different Agent world.\nAs for whether it is the future or just a curiosity — use it once and you will have your answer.\nReferences [1] DeepSeek Harness official site — https://www.deepseek.com/harness/ — and the one-line install npx @deepseek-ai/dsh web, which serves a local web UI that runs once a DeepSeek API key is supplied. [2] The Cordis kernel — the sole irreplaceable core of the system, handling only plugin load/unload and dependency management; its author has joined DeepSeek. The accompanying 88-page paper covers the kernel\u0026rsquo;s two key properties, temporal composability (fully undoing a plugin\u0026rsquo;s side effects on unload) and spatial composability (dynamically re-resolving dependencies as other plugins appear, disappear or are swapped). [3] DeepSeek V4 Pro API pricing referenced in the article — cache-hit price up 12x and peak output at ¥27 — compared against GLM, Qwen 3.8 Max, and the upcoming GLM-5.3; and the fact that Harness does not lock users to DeepSeek models, supporting directory providers plus custom Base URL, protocol and model list. [4] Community plugins cited in the article: dsh-at-file, dsh-genui, dsh-automation, DSH-better-sidebar and ModLens; and the product\u0026rsquo;s four preset modes — Standard, PTC, Minimal and Creative. ","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Tech/DeepSeek-Harness-Is-Not-an-Agent-Product.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eLast week, right after the official release of DeepSeek V4 Pro, they threw out something else called DeepSeek Harness. Its GitHub stars shot to 37,000 in three days. My first reaction was: DeepSeek is finally shipping its own Agent? I installed the developer preview immediately.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOnce it was installed, I was lost — this was nothing like what I imagined an Agent to be. There is no chat box where you say \u0026ldquo;write me a crawler.\u0026rdquo; Instead there is an empty workspace and a long list of plugins I could not make sense of. For a moment I suspected I had installed the wrong thing.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Frankly, DeepSeek Harness Is Not an Agent Product at All"},{"content":"TL;DR\nBIP-110 sought to raise the cost of writing large volumes of contiguous data — Ordinals inscriptions and the like — through a temporary consensus restriction. In the voluntary early-lock-in phase, the proposal drew signals from only 51 blocks — 2.53% support — far below the 55% threshold. Once the mandatory signaling period began, the minority chain formed by supporters produced just two blocks before stalling; BIP-110 is effectively dead as a network-wide consensus upgrade. The debate over on-chain data, protocol neutrality, and development governance will continue; and because the forked chain lacks replay protection, ordinary holders should not rush to move or trade related assets. In the early hours of August 9, Beijing time, Bitcoin reached block height 961,632 and BIP-110 entered its mandatory signaling period. Nodes running BIP-110 rules began rejecting blocks without version bit 4 set, splitting off from the mainnet. Thereafter, the BIP-110 branch produced only two blocks before stalling, while the mainnet kept producing normally. Over the preceding difficulty-adjustment period, only 51 blocks had signaled support — 2.53% — far below the proposal\u0026rsquo;s 55% voluntary early-lock-in threshold. BIP-110 thus never won broad miner support, and ultimately formed a minority chain with negligible hashpower.\nWhat BIP-110 Tries to Solve BIP-110, short for \u0026ldquo;Reduced Data Temporary Softfork,\u0026rdquo; was submitted by pseudonymous developer Dathon Ohm, with Luke Dashjr advising on an early draft. The proposal planned to add seven consensus restrictions over roughly a year, including limiting ordinary new output scripts to 34 bytes, capping new output scriptPubKeys whose first opcode is OP_RETURN at 83 bytes, restricting several categories of data pushes and witness-stack elements to 256 bytes, and constraining some Taproot features.\nIts goal was not to ban on-chain data outright — the proposal itself concedes data can still be split or disguised — but to raise the cost and difficulty of writing large, contiguous data such as Ordinals inscriptions. The BIP-110 text states explicitly that it does not address \u0026ldquo;non-Bitcoin tokens,\u0026rdquo; holding that such matters are better handled at the policy layer. UTXOs created before activation can still be spent under the old rules, but the proposal acknowledges that a small number of cases using pre-signed Taproot transactions or special Miniscript structures could be affected.\nThe immediate backdrop to this controversy was Bitcoin Core 30.0, released in October 2025, which raised the default -datacarriersize from 83 bytes to 100,000 bytes, substantially loosening the default OP_RETURN relay limit. Note that Core 30 changed node transaction-relay and block-template policy, not Bitcoin consensus; BIP-110, by contrast, sought to elevate the restriction to the consensus layer, so that blocks containing the relevant transactions would be judged invalid by nodes enforcing the new rules.\nTimeline: From Proposal to Fork October 10, 2025: Bitcoin Core 30.0 is released, loosening the default OP_RETURN relay policy. October 24, 2025: The first BIP-110 draft takes shape; it is formally assigned the number BIP-110 on December 3. January 28, 2026: The official activation client releases its first production version, v0.1, based on Bitcoin Knots. Several release candidates had come before it. March 1, 2026: Barefoot Mining, via OCEAN, produces the first signaling block in support of BIP-110. March 10, 2026: The official activation client v0.4.1 is released on GitHub; Dathon Ohm announces it publicly on X on March 13. March 31, 2026: Dathon Ohm posts a project update on Delving Bitcoin and announces two implementation PRs submitted to Bitcoin Core; the PRs are subsequently closed automatically, without being merged by Core. June 25, 2026: BIP-110\u0026rsquo;s status is changed to Complete. That status only means the author considers the specification finished and recommends adoption — it does not mean the Bitcoin network has accepted the proposal. July 2026: Controversy erupts. Michael Saylor, Adam Back, PlanB and others publicly oppose it; OCEAN becomes the main source of signals, but overall miner support stays low throughout. OCEAN also upgrades its backend, preparing to record and settle the rewards of the two chains separately once the fork happens. Ordinals advocate Leonidas announces DOG Mode, proposing to loosen node relay rules — the opposite direction from BIP-110. August 9, 2026, Beijing time (August 8 UTC): The mandatory signaling period begins at block 961,632. A non-signaling block produced by AntPool is accepted by the mainnet and rejected by BIP-110 nodes; miners using OCEAN produce a replacement block on the minority chain. That branch stops advancing after producing the block at height 961,633. August 9–10: Roughnecks, which mined the minority chain\u0026rsquo;s two blocks, announces it will stop mining under that organization\u0026rsquo;s name and advises miners continuing with the existing PoW algorithm to pause participation. Some supporters begin discussing switching the branch chain to a different PoW algorithm — which would be yet another rule change beyond the original proposal. Proposals also appear in the Bitcoin BIPs repository to change BIP-110\u0026rsquo;s status from Complete to Deployed and then to Closed. As of publication the relevant PR had not been merged, and the official BIP-110 page still showed Complete; however the repository labels are handled, it does not mean BIP-110 has been activated on the Bitcoin mainnet. What the Two Sides Are Actually Arguing About Supporters argue that miners collect the transaction fee only once, yet every full validating node must download and verify the relevant blocks; nodes without pruning enabled must also store historical blocks long-term and may serve that data to other nodes. Large volumes of non-financial data also compete with payment transactions for block space, raising costs for ordinary transfers. Dathon Ohm and Luke Dashjr therefore contend that users and nodes have the right to define, through a user-activated softfork, the rules they accept, and that miner signaling is not the sole determinant. OCEAN\u0026rsquo;s preparation to settle the two chains separately also reflects that it did not assume all participants would automatically choose the same set of rules.\nOpponents\u0026rsquo; central argument is not whether Ordinals have value, but whether consensus may be changed in order to restrict a use that is unpopular yet currently rule-compliant and fee-paying. Saylor\u0026rsquo;s repeated statements boil down to three points: Bitcoin cannot judge the purpose of data; the dispute should be handled by the fee market and by node and miner policy; and changing consensus to settle a short-term dispute could weaken transactional freedom and the long-term fee market, setting a precedent for excluding other legitimate uses. He compares consensus rules to a constitution, calling BIP-110\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;solution more dangerous than the problem.\u0026rdquo;\nAdam Back calls BIP-110 an attempt to \u0026ldquo;police other people,\u0026rdquo; arguing it conflicts with Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s decentralized, permissionless principles, and predicting in advance that the minority chain would stall from lack of hashpower. PlanB, reasoning from bearer assets and historical experience, argues that supporters misunderstand Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s nature as a decentralized bearer asset and have not learned the lessons of the Bitcoin Cash fork.\nLeonidas\u0026rsquo;s DOG Mode represents the other pole: it does not touch consensus, but plans to loosen node relay policy — raising the standard transaction limit from 400,000 WU to 3,900,000 WU and lowering the dust limit to 1 sat. The proposal aims to widen the propagation space for data transactions such as Ordinals and Runes. Because it concerns only the policy layer, it theoretically requires no network-wide upgrade; but as of the announcement, the project had not released a code repository or formal version open to public review.\nWhere It Goes From Here Judging by the current outcome, BIP-110 has effectively failed as a network-wide Bitcoin consensus upgrade. The minority chain inherited the mainnet\u0026rsquo;s difficulty of roughly 127.48 T yet commands only a trickle of hashpower. Unless it suddenly wins large-scale miner support or switches its PoW rules, it will struggle to complete the next 2,016-block difficulty adjustment — let alone reach its originally planned lock-in and activation heights.\nSaylor estimates that about 99.85% of Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s hashpower remains on the main chain, and says that at the minority chain\u0026rsquo;s roughly 0.15% hashrate, completing its first difficulty adjustment could take about 25 years. That is Saylor\u0026rsquo;s personal estimate based on hashrate ratios, not a measured result; but Roughnecks\u0026rsquo; subsequent halt further weakens the branch\u0026rsquo;s prospects of continuing.\nThat said, BIP-110\u0026rsquo;s failure does not mean the controversy is over. The likelier sequel is that the anti-on-chain-data camp shifts back to node relay policy, miner block templates, and narrower technical proposals, while the Ordinals camp keeps pushing looser relay schemes like DOG Mode. If a consensus change is attempted again, the proposers will need to demonstrate not only node counts but broad economic coordination across miners, exchanges, wallets, custodians, and users.\nFor ordinary holders, the near-term risk comes mainly from the minority chain\u0026rsquo;s lack of built-in replay protection. Bitcoin developer Kevin Loaec and hardware-wallet maker Ledger both warn that while the two chains still accept the same signed transactions, a transaction selling or moving forked coins could be replayed onto the Bitcoin mainnet, taking the corresponding BTC with it. For users unfamiliar with splitting coins, the safest course remains not moving and not trading that branch\u0026rsquo;s assets.\nThe dispute has also spilled into development governance. F2Pool co-founder Wang Chun made sharp criticisms of Luke Dashjr; former Kraken market head Dan Held argues BIP-110 is flawed in technical design and game mechanics, and criticizes its supporters for pushing the proposal with emotion and moral pressure.\nBIP editor Murch has also proposed removing Luke Dashjr from his BIP editor role. He alleges that Luke tried to publicly assign a BIP number before the proposal had been discussed on the mailing list, and merged an update PR minutes after it was created, concluding that Luke\u0026rsquo;s use of editorial privileges did not follow established process. Luke responded that the allegations were false and that he had followed BIP process consistently for years. The PR to remove him remains open and unmerged.\nIn the end, BIP-110 looks more like a governance stress test: nodes can of course choose to enforce their own rules, but whether a UASF can change Bitcoin depends on whether it can win sufficiently broad economic support. Without that coordination, mandatory signaling does not create consensus on its own — it merely leads supporters onto an isolated chain.\nA Closing Thought The most interesting question here is this: who, after all, has the right to change Bitcoin?\nThe answer is that no one really does. Anyone can write a BIP, build their own client, and declare: \u0026ldquo;From such-and-such a block, I will only recognize blocks that comply with this new ruleset.\u0026rdquo; But making that declaration does not mean Bitcoin has actually changed. A BIP being numbered does not count; code being written does not count; even a group of developers supporting it does not count. What matters is whether others follow you.\nBIP-110 is a case in point. After reaching the agreed block height, supporters began rejecting blocks that did not comply with BIP-110 rules. But the overwhelming majority of miners ignored them, kept mining under the old rules, and the Bitcoin mainnet kept running normally. BIP-110\u0026rsquo;s supporters could of course say, \u0026ldquo;We don\u0026rsquo;t recognize the blocks you mined.\u0026rdquo; The problem is that others can equally refuse to recognize yours. The result: the vast majority of hashpower, exchanges, wallets, and users stayed on the original Bitcoin, while the supporters ran off to a chain almost no one was mining and stopped after two blocks. They did not successfully change Bitcoin — they merely forked themselves off.\nOf course, this does not mean miners are in charge either. If one day a large number of users, exchanges, wallets, and custodians all said, \u0026ldquo;We only recognize BTC under the new rules,\u0026rdquo; then even if miners were initially unwilling, they might be forced to follow — because miners ultimately mine to make money. What truly decides Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s rules is not any single formal vote, nor any committee, but simply how many people are ultimately willing to follow along.\nSo BIP-110 actually illustrates, quite vividly, how Bitcoin is governed: anyone can propose a rule change, anyone can reject another\u0026rsquo;s rules, but no one can command the entire network to accept their own. Whether you can truly change Bitcoin ultimately depends not on whether you have written a BIP, but on whether miners, nodes, exchanges, wallets, and users can form a sufficiently broad consensus. Absent that consensus, your so-called \u0026ldquo;changing Bitcoin\u0026rdquo; most likely just creates another chain no one uses.\nReferences [1] BIP-110, \u0026ldquo;Reduced Data Temporary Softfork\u0026rdquo; — submitted by pseudonymous developer Dathon Ohm, with Luke Dashjr advising on the early draft; the seven proposed consensus restrictions and the 55% voluntary early-lock-in threshold. [2] Bitcoin Core 30.0 (October 2025) — raised the default -datacarriersize from 83 bytes to 100,000 bytes; and the on-chain timeline: block height 961,632 entering the mandatory signaling period on August 9, 2026 (Beijing time), the 51 signaling blocks (2.53%), and the two-block minority chain at height 961,633. [3] Public statements by Michael Saylor, Adam Back, PlanB, Leonidas (DOG Mode), OCEAN and Roughnecks; and the BIPs-repository proposals to change BIP-110\u0026rsquo;s status from Complete to Deployed / Closed. [4] Governance dispute: F2Pool co-founder Wang Chun, Dan Held, and BIP editor Murch\u0026rsquo;s proposal to remove Luke Dashjr as BIP editor — and Luke\u0026rsquo;s response. [5] Replay-protection warnings from Bitcoin developer Kevin Loaec and hardware-wallet maker Ledger regarding the forked chain. ","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/BIP-110-Fork-Fails-Who-Can-Change-Bitcoin.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTL;DR\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBIP-110 sought to raise the cost of writing large volumes of contiguous data — Ordinals inscriptions and the like — through a temporary consensus restriction.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIn the voluntary early-lock-in phase, the proposal drew signals from only 51 blocks — 2.53% support — far below the 55% threshold.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOnce the mandatory signaling period began, the minority chain formed by supporters produced just two blocks before stalling; BIP-110 is effectively dead as a network-wide consensus upgrade.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe debate over on-chain data, protocol neutrality, and development governance will continue; and because the forked chain lacks replay protection, ordinary holders should not rush to move or trade related assets.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the early hours of August 9, Beijing time, Bitcoin reached block height 961,632 and BIP-110 entered its mandatory signaling period. Nodes running BIP-110 rules began rejecting blocks without version bit 4 set, splitting off from the mainnet. Thereafter, the BIP-110 branch produced only two blocks before stalling, while the mainnet kept producing normally. Over the preceding difficulty-adjustment period, only 51 blocks had signaled support — 2.53% — far below the proposal\u0026rsquo;s 55% voluntary early-lock-in threshold. BIP-110 thus never won broad miner support, and ultimately formed a minority chain with negligible hashpower.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"BIP-110 Fork Fails: Who Has the Right to Change Bitcoin?"},{"content":"BTC has been climbing and now sits near $65k. The weekend\u0026rsquo;s market was calm. But this weekend in the Bitcoin community was destined to be anything but peaceful.\nA Troubled Weekend Last Friday, the open-source self-custody payment processor BTCPay Server posted an urgent advisory: a critical vulnerability was being actively exploited by attackers and could lead to loss of funds. The official guidance was for all users to upgrade immediately to 2.4.2, and for those who could not upgrade in time, to shut their servers down[1].\nWhat Is BTCPay Server? What is BTCPay Server? It is the payment tool most trusted by Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s hardest-core users. Merchants use it to accept payments with zero fees, and the funds go straight into their own wallets without passing through any third party[2]. From Bitcoin Beach in El Salvador, to an entire commercial district in Costa Rica, to the domain giant Namecheap, all use it to receive Bitcoin. Riding on it, Namecheap has collected over $73 million in Bitcoin across 1.1 million transactions[2].\nThose who use BTCPay are among the most custody-averse users in the Bitcoin world. They run their own nodes, manage their own private keys, and hold their money firmly in their own hands. To them, self-custody is security itself.\nWhat was breached this time was precisely the fortress this group took the most pride in.\nThe Flaw in the Auth Chain The vulnerability lay in BTCPay\u0026rsquo;s API authentication. The system supports a form of Basic authentication — a simplified auth method — where a username and password alone can call the API. Normally, once an admin enables two-factor authentication, a username and password are not enough; a dynamic verification code is also required. But there was an ordering error in the code: Basic authentication was allowed through before the system checked whether the user had 2FA enabled[3].\nIt was precisely this priority error in the authentication chain that rendered 2FA meaningless. The permissions an attacker gained through this flaw let them further steal the macaroon credential file of the LND node, thereby taking control of the Lightning node, closing channels, and sweeping the funds. More critically, old credentials remained valid even after an upgrade — they had to be manually destroyed and regenerated.\nAs long as an attacker obtained the admin account\u0026rsquo;s username and password — whether through weak-password brute force, credential stuffing, or some other channel — they could bypass two-factor authentication and log straight into the backend. The official disclosure did not say how the attackers obtained the credentials, nor how many servers were hit[4]. But the known victims are enough to send a chill down anyone\u0026rsquo;s spine.\nWho Got Drained Hardware wallet maker Foundation had its own Lightning node drained overnight — all channels force-closed, funds swept away[5]. The Lightning node of Bitcoin magazine Citadel21 was also emptied[5]. It all happened silently.\nHow the Bug Was Found What is even more intriguing is how this vulnerability was discovered. Craig Raw, the developer of Sparrow Wallet, lost some of his own funds, dug through logs, investigated, and only then pinned down the problem and reported it to the project[6]. The first person to find the vulnerability turned out to be a user.\nLightning Nodes, Not Hot Wallets What got drained were all Lightning nodes, not ordinary hot wallets. This detail is worth noting. Lightning nodes are natively always online, and the funds in their channels can be force-closed at any moment. BTCPay\u0026rsquo;s selling point is self-managed funds, yet the Lightning node is precisely the part that most depends on a trusted runtime environment. This exposes the fragility of self-custody tools in a \u0026ldquo;hot\u0026rdquo; state — self-custody is not the same as cold storage, and running an LN node is essentially operating a \u0026ldquo;small financial server.\u0026rdquo;\nIt is like locking gold in a safe, but hanging the key on the door lock — and never changing it.\nThe Self-Custody Bargain \u0026ldquo;Misfortune is where fortune rests, and fortune is where misfortune lurks.\u0026rdquo; Self-custody grants people freedom from third-party interference, but also pushes the full burden of security onto each individual\u0026rsquo;s own shoulders. BTCPay has no central operator; the patch must be applied by every server owner themselves. The moment the vulnerability was disclosed, the whole world knew — and those who had not patched were running naked[6].\nAn August of Self-Custody Failures What is even more unsettling is the timing. This August, Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s self-custody tools have been failing one after another. First, the Coldcard hardware wallet was found to have a vulnerability, with over $100 million in Bitcoin stolen[7]. Then the Bitcoin exchange service Boltz suspended operations after being attacked, claiming that AI-assisted attacks found vulnerabilities too fast for the team to keep up[8]. And now BTCPay.\nThe Shadow of AI This vulnerability was not dug out by AI — it was found by a human. Craig Raw, with a refusal to accept the loss, unearthed the truth from the logs[6]. But the shadow of an attack-defense imbalance in the AI era already looms over the entire self-custody ecosystem.\nThe Real Vulnerability Is Cognitive Technical vulnerabilities will be patched sooner or later; what is truly hard to patch is the vulnerability in our understanding. Many equate self-custody with security, yet overlook that self-custody means being your own security team. A single line of buggy code can puncture the most devout faith — and that faith itself should not be built on blind trust.\n\u0026ldquo;A thousand-mile dike collapses from an ant\u0026rsquo;s nest.\u0026rdquo; The security of Bitcoin has never rested on any single tool or any single verification, but on lesson after lesson, layer upon layer of redundancy, and every holder\u0026rsquo;s reverence for their own assets.\nPanic is spreading through the community, but if we look calmly, we see that every crisis also forces evolution. History proves that Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s security layer has been hardened, layer by layer, through attacks.\nWe voluntarily give up the ease of custody, all for the peace of mind that comes from self-mastery. But sacrifice and gain have always been a higher-order dialectic.\nRebirth from the Ashes Some spare no effort to hype a kind of panic: that in the AI era, attackers will be even more unstoppable.\nYet there is reason for the opposite, more optimistic view. Because AI is open, egalitarian, and empowering enough, every self-custody individual can now possess unprecedented security knowledge and self-audit tools, achieving at minimal cost a level of security that in the past only large institutions could reach by spending enormous sums on an entire security team.\nConsider how one can run security scans, refactor, and optimize a tool like bitaddress, then customize a cold-wallet utility to fit one\u0026rsquo;s own needs — a task that, without the assistance of a model like DeepSeek V4, would be impossible to accomplish on shallow cryptography knowledge and coding ability alone.\nTherefore, as large AI models grow ever more capable in security, and as people\u0026rsquo;s awareness and practice of using them to strengthen their own defenses become ever more mature, the descent of self-custody to every individual will accelerate into reality. This, perhaps, is the true path of self-custody faith\u0026rsquo;s rebirth from the ashes.\nReferences [1] BTCPay Server urgent security advisory: a critical API authentication vulnerability under active exploitation; all users told to upgrade to 2.4.2 immediately or shut servers down. [2] BTCPay Server overview — a zero-fee, self-custody payment processor with funds going direct to the merchant\u0026rsquo;s own wallet; adopted by Bitcoin Beach, Costa Rican merchants, and Namecheap ($73M+ in BTC, 1.1M transactions). [3] Vulnerability detail — Basic auth passed before the 2FA check due to an ordering error; attackers could steal the LND macaroon, seize the Lightning node, and sweep funds; old credentials stayed valid post-upgrade and had to be manually rotated. [4] Official disclosure did not state how credentials were obtained or how many servers were compromised. [5] Known victims: hardware wallet maker Foundation and Bitcoin magazine Citadel21 both had Lightning nodes drained. [6] Bug discovered by Sparrow Wallet developer Craig Raw after he lost personal funds; once public, every unpatched server was exposed. [7] Coldcard hardware wallet vulnerability with $100M+ in Bitcoin stolen. [8] Boltz exchange service suspended after an AI-assisted attack outpaced the team\u0026rsquo;s fixes. ","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/Self-Custody-Faith-Collapse-or-Rebirth.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eBTC has been climbing and now sits near $65k. The weekend\u0026rsquo;s market was calm. But this weekend in the Bitcoin community was destined to be anything but peaceful.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Self-Custody Faith: Collapse, or Rebirth from the Ashes?"},{"content":"A recently unsealed criminal complaint from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia has once again ripped the fig leaf off American law enforcement.\nPatrick Steven Yaroch, a former FBI supervisory special agent, is accused of using his position to siphon nearly $1 million in crypto from cryptocurrency accounts linked to a \u0026ldquo;hostile nation\u0026rdquo; (reportedly Russia) that the FBI was monitoring — moving the funds into his own wallet, and even parking part of it in DeFi protocols to earn yield[1].\nPerhaps inexperienced, Yaroch went so far as to ask ChatGPT how to handle the million dollars and plan a retirement in Europe, even booking a flight to Portugal. None of it came to pass: tormented by his conscience, he confessed voluntarily to the FBI, dragging this internal crypto-corruption case into public view.\nThe FBI has since fired Yaroch, stressing that \u0026ldquo;the Bureau holds its employees to the highest ethical standards, and such conduct will not be tolerated.\u0026rdquo;\nThis is hardly the first time a U.S. federal employee has helped themselves to crypto from a position of proximity — in the infamous Silk Road investigation, several federal agents similarly pocketed bitcoin using their authority.\nCase after case serves as a reminder: the \u0026ldquo;decentralization\u0026rdquo; myth of crypto crumbles instantly before the abuse of power. What truly needs fixing is not the blockchain\u0026rsquo;s code, but the toothless oversight apparatus inside the law-enforcement system itself.\nI. A Veteran FBI Agent Who Memorized the Mnemonic Yaroch, 37, joined the FBI\u0026rsquo;s Boston field office in 2017, focusing long-term on national-security investigations — particularly intelligence and counterintelligence operations against \u0026ldquo;hostile nations.\u0026rdquo;\nAccording to the sworn affidavit filed by federal agents, Yaroch gained access to cryptocurrency accounts used by individuals tied to a \u0026ldquo;hostile nation\u0026rdquo; during his investigation.\nThe theft began in late 2024 or early 2025, while Yaroch was still at the Boston office. Through the FBI\u0026rsquo;s internal systems, he obtained the target accounts\u0026rsquo; seed phrases. Rather than downloading or copying the files directly, he chose to commit the words to memory, then created his own wallet and gradually moved the funds in.\nHe admitted to roughly 10 to 12 transfers in total; the funds eventually converged into a personal wallet under his control, worth close to $1 million.\nInterestingly, he did not immediately cash out or move the money abroad. Instead, he mixed the stolen assets with his own. Part sat in a Kraken exchange account; another portion was routed through a Slush wallet into the Suilend DeFi protocol to earn interest. He later explained that one reason he picked Suilend was that he \u0026ldquo;liked its water-drop logo.\u0026rdquo;\nIn fact, as an FBI supervisory special agent, Yaroch held Top Secret / Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) clearance, carried a GS-14 grade (of 15 total), and earned $180,000–$230,000 a year. A mere million dollars hardly seems a fortune to him.\nAt first, the FBI suspected Yaroch had been recruited. But he later told investigators he had not directly interacted with any foreign entity or person linked to the accounts, and there is currently no evidence he did.\nYaroch explained that he had simply grown frustrated with the FBI\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;inability or unwillingness to act to disrupt the use of these accounts.\u0026rdquo; In his view, the assets were being used to support hostile activity, yet the FBI could only collect intelligence — it could not seize or block them. That frustration became the starting point for his decision to \u0026ldquo;take matters into his own hands.\u0026rdquo;\nII. ChatGPT Becomes a \u0026ldquo;Financial-Immigration Adviser\u0026rdquo; On the surface, Yaroch\u0026rsquo;s actions might sound idealistic — a patriot acting out of concern for his country. The truth, however, is deflating. ChatGPT conversation logs extracted from his phone tell a different story[2].\nOn May 28, 2026, he asked how to invest or spend $1 million; on June 4, he pressed further on the feasibility of \u0026ldquo;leaving the U.S. for a European country with $1 million.\u0026rdquo; Based on his age (37), his young family, his wish to retire around 40, and his preference for a slow-paced vineyard or agricultural lifestyle, ChatGPT recommended places like Cilento, Italy, or the Douro region of Portugal — singling out Portugal as the top choice.\nAround the same time, Yaroch booked flights from Washington to Lisbon/Porto for September 3–11, 2026, traveling with his wife and children. He also signed a power of attorney (June 15, 2026) authorizing a Portuguese lawyer on tax-ID, customs, and financial matters, and personally visited the finance office to collect a password — the typical precursor to buying property or securing long-term residency. Moreover, he took multiple unreported overseas trips in 2026: Germany and Portugal in May, and Grenada from late June to early July.\nProsecutors read these actions as potential signs of flight or asset transfer. Yaroch himself said it was all \u0026ldquo;eating him up inside,\u0026rdquo; and that he wanted \u0026ldquo;to get it off his chest.\u0026rdquo; On July 29, 2026, he self-reported to the Justice Department and the FBI, surrendering the handwritten seed-phrase note and a Trezor hardware wallet, among other items. On July 31, the FBI fired him and made the arrest.\nOn the day of his arrest, he told the agents: \u0026ldquo;I know I probably won\u0026rsquo;t make it, but I hope my wife and kids can still go to Portugal as planned.\u0026rdquo;\nHe now faces charges of transporting and receiving stolen goods across state lines; the case remains before the Eastern District of Virginia.\nIII. The FBI\u0026rsquo;s Own Blind Spot? The case is not complicated, yet it leaves many questions — and makes many crypto holders uneasy.\nFirst, the FBI\u0026rsquo;s reach is vast: anyone flagged as a \u0026ldquo;hostile-nation person\u0026rdquo; lands on a watchlist, and even decentralized crypto assets are not safe — the FBI can obtain seed phrases through informants or technical means. Remember, these were self-custodied assets, not held on an exchange, yet they still fell into the FBI\u0026rsquo;s hands. There was no safety to speak of.\nTellingly, last year the U.S. Justice Department indicted Chen Zhi, founder and chairman of Cambodia\u0026rsquo;s Prince Group, and seized 127,000 BTC (worth about $15 billion at the time). Those assets had been held in a non-custodial wallet controlled by Chen, with the private key in his own possession — yet the U.S. government still obtained the key through various means[3].\nSecond, U.S. federal agencies lack an effective internal oversight system. Even extremely sensitive data like seed phrases — stored in FBI case systems and files as investigation evidence, accessible to the agents working the case — can, in the hands of anyone with a decent memory, simply be flown to a country with no extradition treaty, where they log into the wallet at an internet cafe and cash out.\nThird, the strangest part of this case: the FBI is a world-class investigative agency, yet it noticed nothing when its own internal data was being stolen.\nWhen Yaroch moved the $1 million out of the wallet, the FBI\u0026rsquo;s blockchain-monitoring team almost certainly caught the large transfer. But the analysts likely assumed it was the hostile actors laundering or consolidating funds to evade sanctions. They may even have updated their intelligence graphs to track the new addresses.\nFrom start to finish, did no one suspect the money had been diverted by an insider? Or did everyone know perfectly well and simply say nothing? Before the Yaroch case surfaced, how many such insider thefts had occurred is unknown. Perhaps this is precisely how the \u0026ldquo;Inspector Smiths\u0026rdquo; make their living.\nFinally, the irony: if Yaroch had not turned himself in, the FBI would most likely never have caught him. After all, all the money moved on-chain, with no real-name binding to him.\nIV. A Recurring Pattern: Federal Agents Abusing Power The Yaroch case is not isolated. Over the past decade, cases of U.S. federal law-enforcement officers using their positions to dip into crypto have been all too common, each drawing enormous attention.\nThe most famous dates to 2015, tied to the Silk Road dark-web investigation. At the time, DEA Special Agent Carl Mark Force IV and Secret Service Special Agent Shaun W. Bridges were both charged with stealing bitcoin during the probe.\nForce, working undercover, used a fake identity to communicate with Silk Road founder Ross Ulbricht, pocketing and concealing crypto obtained in the investigation and moving it to personal accounts. He also abused his authority to freeze an exchange account\u0026rsquo;s assets and transfer roughly $300,000 into his own — more than $700,000 in crypto altogether. Force ultimately pleaded guilty and was sentenced to six and a half years.\nBridges, after gaining control of Silk Road-related bitcoin, moved over 20,000 BTC (worth $800,000 at the time) through Mt. Gox and into personal investment accounts, trying to obscure the trail with complex transactions. Bridges was eventually sentenced to 71 months for money laundering and obstruction of justice; in 2017 he received an added 24 months for a separate theft of about 1,600 bitcoin from a government wallet, and was ordered to forfeit a large amount of bitcoin[4].\nThese cases occurred in bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s early days, when crypto regulation and tracing technology were far less mature than today. Once an agent obtained a private key or account control, the temptation to reach in proved strong. Like Yaroch\u0026rsquo;s case, the motives were a messy mix of greed, frustration with the pace of investigations, and various strokes of luck.\nClosing For the entire U.S. federal law-enforcement apparatus, the Yaroch case is another reminder: the anonymity and irreversibility of crypto pose a severe test for the enforcers themselves. Even under top-tier clearance and tight monitoring of internal systems, human risk persists.\nThe weaknesses of human nature are often harder to guard against than any technical flaw. This near-million-dollar crypto theft may well become an important catalyst for reform in how federal agencies manage digital assets.\nReferences [1] U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia — criminal complaint against former FBI supervisory special agent Patrick Steven Yaroch (unsealed 2026); the FBI\u0026rsquo;s sworn affidavit detailing the theft, the seed-phrase access, and the ~10–12 transfers totaling nearly $1 million. [2] ChatGPT conversation logs extracted from Yaroch\u0026rsquo;s phone (2026-05-28, 2026-06-04), in which he sought advice on spending / investing $1 million and relocating to Europe; his flight and power-of-attorney records, self-report to the DOJ / FBI (2026-07-29), and arrest (2026-07-31). [3] U.S. Department of Justice — indictment of Cambodia\u0026rsquo;s Prince Group founder and chairman Chen Zhi and the seizure of 127,000 BTC (≈ $15 billion at the time) from a non-custodial wallet whose private key was obtained by U.S. authorities. [4] Historical Silk Road cases: convictions of DEA Special Agent Carl Mark Force IV (six and a half years) and Secret Service Special Agent Shaun W. Bridges (71 months, plus 24 months in 2017 for a separate theft of ~1,600 BTC). ","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/FBI-Agent-Memorized-Seed-Phrase-Stole-1M-Crypto.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eA recently unsealed criminal complaint from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia has once again ripped the fig leaf off American law enforcement.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePatrick Steven Yaroch, a former FBI supervisory special agent, is accused of using his position to siphon nearly $1 million in crypto from cryptocurrency accounts linked to a \u0026ldquo;hostile nation\u0026rdquo; (reportedly Russia) that the FBI was monitoring — moving the funds into his own wallet, and even parking part of it in DeFi protocols to earn yield[1].\u003c/p\u003e","title":"FBI Agent Memorized the Seed Phrase, Stole $1 Million in Crypto"},{"content":"Overnight, the apps of 29 overseas crypto exchanges vanished from Google Play in South Korea. This was no technical glitch — it was a surgical strike by Korean regulators.\nOn July 24, 2026, South Korea\u0026rsquo;s crypto community erupted. Search Google Play for OKX, Bybit, MEXC, KuCoin, Gemini, or BitMEX — all gone.\nThe trigger was a long-gestating action by the Korea Financial Intelligence Unit (KoFIU): every overseas exchange app that has not completed Virtual Asset Service Provider (VASP) registration with the KoFIU is to be removed from Google Play[1].\nThe affected list includes OKX, Bybit, MEXC, KuCoin, Gemini, Backpack, and BitMEX — essentially every offshore derivatives platform Korean retail traders rely on most.\nWhy South Korea Is Blocking Them The root is South Korea\u0026rsquo;s Act on Reporting and Use of Specific Financial Transaction Information. The law requires every crypto asset service provider serving Korean users to register with the KoFIU. For overseas exchanges, however, the bar is extremely high: they must establish a local Korean legal entity, deploy AML and KYC systems that meet Korean standards, and obtain information-security management certification[1].\nTo date, only 27 domestic Korean platforms have completed registration — and not a single overseas exchange has gone through the process.\nKorea did not act out of nowhere. As early as March 2025, Google Play had already begun removing some overseas exchange apps. In January 2026, Google formally notified developers that exchange apps targeting Korean users must submit KoFIU VASP registration proof, or they cannot be listed or updated[2]. From January 28 of this year, unregistered overseas exchange apps could no longer be newly downloaded from Google Play in Korea.\nBut the policy only truly landed in July. As of July 24, at least 29 of the overseas derivatives exchanges ranked in CoinMarketCap\u0026rsquo;s top 50 had been shown the door by Korean Google Play — 14 of which the KoFIU had previously flagged as \u0026ldquo;unregistered VASPs\u0026rdquo;[3].\nWhat It Means for Ordinary Users If you already have these apps installed, you can keep using them for now. What you cannot do is receive updates and security patches through Google Play. Over time, falling behind on app versions, unpatched security holes, and unavailable new features are only a matter of time — assuming the pattern does not change.\nWorth noting: this blockade covers Google Play only. Apple\u0026rsquo;s App Store has not followed suit, and web access to the affected exchanges is unaffected. How long that patchwork of uneven enforcement holds, though, is anyone\u0026rsquo;s guess.\nCompliance: Not a Choice, but a Ticket In Binance pushed out of the EU, 29 overseas exchanges banned in Korea, end-to-end regulation landing in Hong Kong — the global door of compliance is visibly swinging shut. When app stores become a more efficient licensing-enforcement tool than any government agency, compliance capability has become the core barrier to market participation.\nKorea\u0026rsquo;s approach reveals a trend: regulation is shifting from ex-post punishment to ex-ante blocking.\nWhen exchanges are driven from the market and apps are delisted in batches, compliance is not a bonus — it is the admission ticket.\nReferences [1] South Korea\u0026rsquo;s Act on Reporting and Use of Specific Financial Transaction Information and the KoFIU\u0026rsquo;s VASP registration regime — the requirement to establish a local legal entity, deploy Korean-standard AML / KYC systems, and obtain information-security certification; only 27 domestic platforms registered, and no overseas exchange has completed the process. [2] Google Play enforcement timeline: partial delistings began in March 2025; Google notified developers in January 2026 that Korean-facing exchange apps must submit KoFIU VASP registration proof; from January 28, 2026, unregistered apps could no longer be newly downloaded. [3] As of July 24, 2026, at least 29 of CoinMarketCap\u0026rsquo;s top-50 overseas derivatives exchanges had been removed from Korean Google Play, 14 of them previously flagged by the KoFIU as unregistered VASPs; the blockade covers Google Play only, not the Apple App Store or web access. [4] Compiled from public reporting by CoinDesk, The Block, Foresight News and ChainCatcher. ","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/South-Korea-Bans-29-Overseas-Crypto-Exchanges.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eOvernight, the apps of 29 overseas crypto exchanges vanished from Google Play in South Korea. This was no technical glitch — it was a surgical strike by Korean regulators.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOn July 24, 2026, South Korea\u0026rsquo;s crypto community erupted. Search Google Play for OKX, Bybit, MEXC, KuCoin, Gemini, or BitMEX — all gone.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe trigger was a long-gestating action by the Korea Financial Intelligence Unit (KoFIU): \u003cstrong\u003eevery overseas exchange app that has not completed Virtual Asset Service Provider (VASP) registration with the KoFIU is to be removed from Google Play\u003c/strong\u003e[1].\u003c/p\u003e","title":"South Korea Bans 29 Overseas Crypto Exchanges — MEXC, OKX, KuCoin and Others Delisted"},{"content":" Today is January 3, 2024, the 15th birthday of Bitcoin. Let\u0026rsquo;s first wish Bitcoin a happy 15th birthday!\nThe conventional narrative in the media goes like this: 15 years ago, on January 3, 2009, Satoshi Nakamoto launched Bitcoin on a server in Helsinki, Finland.\nHowever, according to NickYam\u0026rsquo;s investigation, the actual truth is more likely that Satoshi Nakamoto received The Times newspaper from January 3 to 9 of that year, conducted a trial run for a few days, and officially launched Bitcoin on the 9th.\nHowever, regardless of the details, Satoshi Nakamoto chose the publication date of The Times newspaper on January 3 as the timestamp for the Genesis Block. Therefore, people consider January 3, 2009, as the birthdate of Bitcoin.\n15 years, truly, how time flies.\nToday, Bitcoin has evolved from being virtually worthless to becoming a unique global asset with a market value of $886.2 billion, surpassing the market capitalization of Elon Musk\u0026rsquo;s Tesla and Warren Buffett\u0026rsquo;s Berkshire Hathaway, and ranking among the top ten global assets.\nToday, the Bitcoin ETF approval is imminent, and global asset management giants such as BlackRock and Fidelity have already entered the fray, submitting applications for Bitcoin ETFs to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).\nHowever, some are still in a state of observation, skepticism, and ridicule. From being unable to see, to being unable to understand, to looking down upon it, ultimately, it\u0026rsquo;s a matter of falling behind.\nBitcoin is a touchstone. The way one approaches Bitcoin is enough to depict a person\u0026rsquo;s essence. A Bitcoin holder\u0026rsquo;s history of holding Bitcoin is the strongest reflection of their character. This radiance cannot be concealed, nor can it be masked. It is the best portrayal of a person\u0026rsquo;s true personality. For every Bitcoin holder, there are only two kinds of people in this world: those who hold Bitcoin and those who don\u0026rsquo;t. For the latter, we can instantly identify that they are not qualified partners.\nIf a financial influencer, by this time, is still loudly warning you to stay away from Bitcoin, whether they invoke conspiracy theories or ideological cudgels, it is advisable for you to distance yourself from such an influencer. After all, filling your mind every day with low, weak, and anti-intellectual porridge will eventually turn your brain into porridge.\nBitcoin teaches without speaking; its actions instruct. It has taught us too many things, impacting our concepts and shaking our minds at every moment.\nThrough prolonged interaction, it gradually elevates our level of thinking and cognitive understanding.\nLet\u0026rsquo;s take an example. It is well-known that obtaining Bitcoin requires Proof of Work (PoW), which involves computational power, i.e., computer hardware and electrical energy. Even in the early days when Bitcoin seemed to have no utility (and may still seem useless to many today), everyone needed to incur this cost to obtain it.\nBitcoin teaches us about the principles of \u0026ldquo;preciousness\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;utility.\u0026rdquo;\nWhat is precious will eventually be useful, but what is useful is not necessarily precious.\nThe periodic table of chemical elements has hundreds of elements. Many of them, when discovered, were considered to have no apparent utility. For example, rare earth elements had little value before the Industrial Revolution, but as scientific and technological development progressed, these rare elements became highly valuable.\nOn the other hand, items like bread and air are highly useful to humans, indispensable even, but no one would consider them highly precious.\nTraditional industries, including traditional Internet (referred to as Web 2.0), focus on being \u0026ldquo;useful.\u0026rdquo; The starting point is to create something useful, sell it to users, and make money.\nBitcoin, including blockchain (referred to as Web 3.0), starts from being \u0026ldquo;precious.\u0026rdquo; Even if no one knows what use it has now, the key is to make people pay a cost (and prevent cheating) to obtain it, thereby making people cherish and value it.\nGoods will be useful because they are precious, but not necessarily precious because they are useful. The blockchain differs from traditional industries and the traditional Internet precisely in the logic of this difference.\nDifferent logic leads to completely different ways of thinking and methodologies. Different starting points mean completely different sequences of doing things.\nFundamentally, it is because humans have subjective agency. They will automatically and spontaneously seek utility for precious possessions.\nSo, what is the source of value?\nSubjective value theory argues it is demand, while the labor theory of value argues it is labor. This economic philosophy can also be attributed to the analysis of \u0026ldquo;useful\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;precious\u0026rdquo;:\nThe feeling of \u0026ldquo;useful\u0026rdquo; is determined by the usage scenario, while the feeling of \u0026ldquo;precious\u0026rdquo; is determined by the cost incurred.\nI was once obsessed with subjective value theory and read \u0026ldquo;Human Action\u0026rdquo; repeatedly. But when exploring Bitcoin in depth, engaging in blockchain practices, I increasingly realized the power of the labor theory of value and began to repeatedly study \u0026ldquo;Capital.\u0026rdquo;\n\u0026ldquo;Capital\u0026rdquo; plainly states that the increase in productivity will lead to a decrease in value. The more efficient, the less valuable. Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s PoW efficiency is very low, so its value is high. Other chains are pursuing higher efficiency, which means they are actually pursuing lower value. (By the way, the same logic applies to AI.)\nIf this abstract explanation seems counterintuitive, let\u0026rsquo;s use the recent example of giving away gas to engrave inscriptions to illustrate.\nThese 10,000 engraved collectibles can be processed in several ways:\nThe most efficient method: Write a crawler to download 10,000 avatars. Then write a script that can complete all engravings on the chain within a few hours. It\u0026rsquo;s extremely accurate, fast, and efficient.\nA moderately efficient method: Download the avatars, encode them, and then develop a \u0026ldquo;one-click engrave\u0026rdquo; webpage, allowing users to quickly complete the engravings on the chain with just a few clicks. Since human actions are minimal and there is little need for manual input, there is almost no chance of making mistakes.\nThe least efficient method: There is only one on-chain contract, and all others require users to do it themselves. Users need to manually download avatar images, encode them using encoding tools, manually copy and paste into the contract interaction tool, manually verify inputs are correct, manually complete wallet installation and network addition, manually request gas from the contract, manually interact with the contract to complete on-chain actions. This set of actions takes a long time, is laborious, and there is a certain probability of making mistakes or damaging the engraving.\nAfter completing 10,000 engravings using these three methods, which method produces the highest value? I think the answer is self-evident.\nFrom the perspective of \u0026ldquo;usefulness,\u0026rdquo; what\u0026rsquo;s the point of engraving these pictures on the chain? It\u0026rsquo;s hard to figure out no matter how much you think about it. However, looking at it from the perspective of \u0026ldquo;preciousness,\u0026rdquo; the product of one\u0026rsquo;s own labor and sweat, engraved by the blockchain, forming a unique collection, irreplaceable and delightful to look at every time, the heart feels joyous. \u0026ldquo;The importance is not the picture itself but that I personally engraved it.\u0026rdquo; Rationality is limited, and feelings won\u0026rsquo;t deceive people. This is what Wang Yangming called \u0026ldquo;brightness within.\u0026rdquo;\nImagine if Satoshi Nakamoto had issued all 21 million bitcoins directly in the code in January 2009. What would be the value of Bitcoin today?\nBut Satoshi Nakamoto chose not to. He wanted to mobilize people all over the world, consume so much manpower, resources, energy, and land, and still take more than a hundred years (approximately until 2140) to produce all these 21 million bitcoins.\nLow efficiency is indisputable.\nValue is undeniably high.\nYou may argue that without PoW, other methods, such as setting rules, can also artificially create scarcity, right? However, rules set by people can be broken by people. Satoshi Nakamoto didn\u0026rsquo;t believe that people could uphold their principles in the face of tremendous incentives. It\u0026rsquo;s not that he was unwilling to believe in people but that he couldn\u0026rsquo;t trust people. After all, Satoshi Nakamoto explicitly wrote in the Bitcoin whitepaper: \u0026ldquo;What we need is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of (trust in) trust.\u0026rdquo; Only with substantial costs will people be convinced of Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s preciousness.\nOnly with sufficient preciousness will Bitcoin be continually explored and discovered for its usefulness.\nBitcoin is useful because\nit is precious.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/wish-bitcoin-a-happy-birthday.html","summary":"\u003c!-- more --\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eToday is January 3, 2024, the 15th birthday of Bitcoin. Let\u0026rsquo;s first wish Bitcoin a happy 15th birthday!\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe conventional narrative in the media goes like this: 15 years ago, on January 3, 2009, Satoshi Nakamoto launched Bitcoin on a server in Helsinki, Finland.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHowever, according to \u003ca href=\"https://mr.nickyam.com\"\u003eNickYam\u003c/a\u003e\u0026rsquo;s investigation, the actual truth is more likely that Satoshi Nakamoto received The Times newspaper from January 3 to 9 of that year, conducted a trial run for a few days, and officially launched Bitcoin on the 9th.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Wish Bitcoin a happy 15th birthday !"},{"content":" Introduction Whenever the topic of the value of BTC (Bitcoin) is discussed, people often find themselves in endless debates. Even with the use of the three treasures - left-hand Austrian, right-hand Marxian - and reciting Keynes, it seems that the problem remains unresolved.\nSome say BTC is worthless garbage.\nSome say BTC has no intrinsic value but has a price.\nSome say BTC has value because it is scarce.\nSome say BTC has value because it is the product of immense electrical energy condensation.\nSome say BTC has value because miners provide significant computational power for security.\nSome say BTC has value due to gray demands such as money laundering by criminals.\nSome say BTC has value because it satisfies the needs of storing and transferring value for people.\nThe opinions vary, and there is no consensus.\nSome approach the issue from the perspective of production and supply, while others look at it from the viewpoint of consumption and demand, and still others analyze it through the lens of transactions and price discovery. Does value come from production, or does it come from demand? We cannot stay on the surface; instead, we need to delve deeper and explore the origin of demand.\nMeaning of Demand In economics, the term \u0026ldquo;demand\u0026rdquo; is typically considered in relation to its counterpart, \u0026ldquo;supply.\u0026rdquo;\nThe existence of these two terms presupposes the presence of a market.\nTo delve into the original logic, we cannot start with the assumption that the market already exists and only examine what happens afterward. However, many people may limit their thinkings to the idea that the market naturally exists after its birth, which is naive and childish.\nFriends familiar with how the internet works might know about a famous debate in the product management field, the distinction between \u0026ldquo;need\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;want.\u0026rdquo;\nChinese word formation provides us with insight: \u0026ldquo;demand\u0026rdquo; is composed of \u0026ldquo;need\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;request.\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;Need\u0026rdquo; is the self-requirement, a kind of desire. \u0026ldquo;Request\u0026rdquo; is the method of obtaining satisfaction for that desire. This method is \u0026ldquo;request,\u0026rdquo; not \u0026ldquo;grab,\u0026rdquo; not \u0026ldquo;steal,\u0026rdquo; and not \u0026ldquo;deceive.\u0026rdquo;\nProduct managers focus on the \u0026ldquo;need\u0026rdquo; part to explain the intrinsic motivation behind human behavior. Here, Maslow\u0026rsquo;s hierarchy of needs is often brought up. Freud\u0026rsquo;s psychoanalysis and libido are also guiding principles for the early development of explicit content business on the internet.\nEconomics does not concern itself with the \u0026ldquo;need\u0026rdquo; part but only with the \u0026ldquo;request\u0026rdquo; part. As the Austrian economic master Mises said, economics is only concerned with purposeful human action, not the forces and factors that prompt someone to act, nor the purpose of the action, whether it is right or wrong, noble or base. (Mises, \u0026ldquo;Human Action,\u0026rdquo; Chapter 1, Human Action)\nTherefore, the focus of demand lies in the word \u0026ldquo;request.\u0026rdquo; People seek because of their needs. \u0026ldquo;Need\u0026rdquo; relates to one\u0026rsquo;s own needs, while \u0026ldquo;request\u0026rdquo; is about external requisition. \u0026ldquo;Need\u0026rdquo; is the relationship between things and people, while \u0026ldquo;request\u0026rdquo; is the relationship between people. Just as rice can satisfy my desire to eat and defines the use value of rice, it is a \u0026ldquo;need.\u0026rdquo; However, when I open an app and order takeout from a restaurant, seeking rice from the restaurant, it is a relationship between me and the restaurant, a \u0026ldquo;request.\u0026rdquo;\nThe relationship between things and people defines the use value of things, just as rice fills my stomach, defining the use value of rice. The relationship between people defines the exchange value of things, just as the relationship between a restaurant and me defines the exchange value of rice and takeout. What we call value is economic value, exchange value. (Marx, \u0026ldquo;Capital,\u0026rdquo; Volume 1, Chapter 1, Commodities)\nThus, there must be society first, then social relationships between people, and finally, the birth of value. Without society, without social relationships, there is no value to speak of. In this sense, relationships are value, and value is relationships.\nWith society established, value created, and markets formed, one of the significant functions of the market is price discovery, reflecting value as a monetary measure. At this point, money becomes a sacred totem, and the quantity of money becomes the best proof of value.\nWhen you work overtime to complete a perfect task, and your boss, after reviewing it, pats you on the shoulder and says, \u0026ldquo;Young man, you did a great job. The work outcome has great value!\u0026rdquo; Your boss is not praising the neatness of your code, the beauty of your documentation, or the attractiveness of your data. The true, subconscious meaning is undoubtedly: this thing will definitely make the company a lot of money.\nOne common reason for the psychological distress of employees is often due to the misalignment between their evaluation criteria for work and their boss\u0026rsquo;s criteria. If what you perceive as beautiful and perfect cannot help your boss make a fortune, it is considered worthless.\nThe only value of employees is in how much money they can make for their bosses.\nIn the eyes of the boss, there is only money; otherwise, they wouldn\u0026rsquo;t be a qualified boss and would eventually be eliminated by the market. Money has long transformed into value itself.\nThe market provides everyone with the strictest judgment criterion: demand. If what you create cannot meet market demand, you won\u0026rsquo;t make money, and you have no value.\nThe brilliant Sir Keynes focused on demand itself. By printing money to stimulate demand, companies can make money, creating an illusion that our products are still valuable. This drives the entire economic machine. This is the Keynesianism widely adopted in the world today.\nKeynes\u0026rsquo;s Inner OS: As long as money is printed frantically, even dog feces can soar.\nRegardless of what people claim to be their economic philosophy, when it comes to real market investments with real money and real risks, they all fall at the feet of Keynes. Otherwise, why do investors worldwide always pay the utmost attention to the monetary policy of the Federal Reserve!\nPrerequisites of Demand Through the analysis above, we understand that the prerequisites of demand are society, value, and market.\nIf everyone is a superman, capable of doing everything on their own without needing help from others, there would be no society, and value would be meaningless.\nIf there is no peaceful environment, no legal norms, and it is easier to rob, steal, and deceive than to engage in fair exchange, there would be no market, and demand would have no roots.\nFor example, if a tiger wants to eat a rabbit, is this demand? Clearly not.\nBut if you want to eat chicken, it is a demand. Why? Not because you cannot defeat a chicken but because the chicken has an owner. Your relationship with the chicken owner is a social relationship that defines value and demand. This is the essence and significance of property rights.\nIf you say you can kill the chicken owner and then eat his chicken, you also kill demand, kill the value of the chicken. When the property rights of the chicken owner over the chicken are destroyed, the chicken loses its value and only the use value of being eaten remains.\nPeace requires constraints on violence, and laws are built on the foundation of the deterrent power of punishment. This requires stronger violence beyond the capabilities of individuals to deter and punish individuals who use violence to destroy property rights and undermine value. Hence, the state is born.\nThe reason demand arises lies in repeated evaluations, not using unfair exchange means but employing other methods\nsuch as robbing, stealing, and cheating, which have higher costs and greater risks, leading back to the rules of the market.\nIf all the above prerequisites are lost, even if only some are lost, robbers, thieves, and fraudsters will flood the land. The so-called market demand and consumers will cease to exist.\nMost of the time, economics focuses on what happens inside the market. This often causes people who study economics, intentionally or unintentionally, to overlook various prerequisites outside and above the market, creating blind spots in their thinking.\nBitcoin\u0026rsquo;s immense computational power is a form of special violence, and Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s cryptographic mathematics is a form of special law. These things precisely exist beyond the market.\nThis is why the more someone claims to be well-versed in economics, the more they may fail to understand Bitcoin. Because Bitcoin has too much, too many things that fall within the blind spots of their thinking.\nHuman Demand and Value of Bitcoin In summary, we have a rough understanding of the origin of demand.\nSo why do people have a genuine demand for Bitcoin?\nBitcoin provides an alternative to state violence, competing with it and offering unique protection for property rights. This is an important prerequisite for generating demand and achieving value.\nIf you can\u0026rsquo;t rob, steal, or cheat, you are left with only the path of fair exchange. Fair exchange allows value to be realized.\nMost altcoins cannot compete with high-level violence and instead depend on state violence to exist. Therefore, they cannot become substitutes and competitors for the latter, fail to provide property rights protection beyond state violence, and do not have unique value.\nDemand begins with the human heart, and seeking comes from strength.\nBitcoin, with its indestructible computational power, catalyzes people\u0026rsquo;s needs into demand. Demand further transforms into value, and value further takes shape as price.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/the-origin-of-demand-why-bitcoin-holds-value.html","summary":"\u003c!-- more --\u003e\n\u003ch1 id=\"introduction\"\u003eIntroduction\u003c/h1\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhenever the topic of the value of BTC (Bitcoin) is discussed, people often find themselves in endless debates. Even with the use of the three treasures - left-hand Austrian, right-hand Marxian - and reciting Keynes, it seems that the problem remains unresolved.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSome say BTC is worthless garbage.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSome say BTC has no intrinsic value but has a price.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSome say BTC has value because it is scarce.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"The Origin of Demand, with a Discussion on Why Bitcoin Holds Value"},{"content":" The stock guru Warren Buffett has always been known for his staunch anti-cryptocurrency stance.\nIn 2019, the Oracle of Omaha said on a television interview, \u0026ldquo;All cryptocurrencies will eventually come to a bad ending.\u0026rdquo;\nIn 2021, Warren Buffett\u0026rsquo;s partner, Charlie Munger, publicly criticized Bitcoin during a shareholders\u0026rsquo; meeting, calling it \u0026ldquo;disgusting and contrary to the interests of civilization.\u0026rdquo; Warren Buffett himself has also publicly referred to Bitcoin as \u0026ldquo;rat poison\u0026rdquo; in the past.\nIn 2022, Warren Buffett criticized Bitcoin at a shareholder meeting, stating that it is not a productive asset and suggesting that \u0026ldquo;all the Bitcoin in the world is only worth $25.\u0026rdquo;\nSo, how did Warren Buffett\u0026rsquo;s Berkshire Hathaway and Bitcoin perform relative to each other during the bull and bear market cycle of 2021-2022?\nStarting from January 3, 2021, and ending on October 27, 2023, which is approximately 2 years and 10 months, the market capitalization of Berkshire Hathaway has temporarily surpassed the total market capitalization of Bitcoin.\nIf we only consider the total market capitalization in terms of US dollars, we are still using the US dollar as the measuring tool for wealth. Let\u0026rsquo;s change our perspective and use Bitcoin as a more openly transparent and reliable measuring tool.\nSince the total market capitalization of Berkshire Hathaway is higher than that of Bitcoin, and practically speaking, it\u0026rsquo;s not possible to sell all of Berkshire\u0026rsquo;s stocks and buy Bitcoin entirely. If such an operation were attempted, Berkshire\u0026rsquo;s stock price would experience a significant discount during the selling process, while Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s price would skyrocket.\nLet\u0026rsquo;s assume that Warren Buffett takes 1% of Berkshire\u0026rsquo;s market capitalization and uses it to acquire Bitcoin. This way, we can assume that the operation will not affect the market prices of both assets.\nSo, in the current month of October 2023, 1% of Berkshire\u0026rsquo;s $733 billion total market capitalization is $7.33 billion, divided by the current price of Bitcoin, which is approximately $34,000, is roughly equivalent to 215,000 BTC.\nThis is equivalent to 1.1% of the total Bitcoin supply mined so far, which is 19.52 million BTC.\nIn other words, if Warren Buffett were to allocate 1% of his managed asset portfolio to Bitcoin at this point, he would own 1.1% of the total wealth measured in Bitcoin.\nWhat about going back to January 2021? At that time, Berkshire Hathaway had a total market capitalization of $543 billion, and the price of Bitcoin was $32,000.\nSo, going back to January 2021, with 1% of $543 billion, which is $5.43 billion, divided by the price of Bitcoin at that time, $32,000, is roughly equivalent to 170,000 BTC. Now, let\u0026rsquo;s calculate the percentage of the total Bitcoin supply that this represents at that time.\nWe can use the formula 6.25 * 6 * 24 * (365 * 2 + 30 * 10) to calculate the incremental Bitcoin mined during the 2 years and 10 months, which is approximately 927,000 BTC. Using this information, we can deduce that the total mined Bitcoin supply in January 2021 was roughly 1,859.8 million BTC, which means the percentage of Bitcoin that Warren Buffett\u0026rsquo;s 1% represents at that time is about 0.9%.\nIn other words, not only did Warren Buffett increase the absolute quantity of Bitcoin he can exchange, but he also increased his percentage from 0.9% of the total Bitcoin supply to 1.1%. His wealth accumulation rate is faster than the rate at which new Bitcoins are being created. In other words, Bitcoin is concentrating in Warren Buffett\u0026rsquo;s hands at a faster rate, and when measured using Bitcoin as a fair benchmark, the result is that wealth inequality is increasing.\nIf you want to bring Warren Buffett\u0026rsquo;s percentage back to the 0.9% level at the beginning of 2021, assuming other parameters remain the same, the price of Bitcoin would need to be approximately $42,000.\nIn this current strong US dollar cycle that is redistributing global wealth, Warren Buffett, who understands the rules of wealth transfer and applies them effectively, is undoubtedly a big winner in the \u0026ldquo;set and win\u0026rdquo; game.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/Buffett_Outperforms_Bitcoin.html","summary":"\u003c!-- more --\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe stock guru Warren Buffett has always been known for his staunch anti-cryptocurrency stance.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn 2019, the Oracle of Omaha said on a television interview, \u0026ldquo;All cryptocurrencies will eventually come to a bad ending.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn 2021, Warren Buffett\u0026rsquo;s partner, Charlie Munger, publicly criticized Bitcoin during a shareholders\u0026rsquo; meeting, calling it \u0026ldquo;disgusting and contrary to the interests of civilization.\u0026rdquo; Warren Buffett himself has also publicly referred to Bitcoin as \u0026ldquo;rat poison\u0026rdquo; in the past.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Buffett Outperforms Bitcoin"},{"content":"Yesterday, Blockstream\u0026rsquo;s founder and renowned cryptographer Adam Back, in an interview with Bloomberg, mentioned that Bitcoin could potentially surpass $100,000 before the halving event in the first half of 2024.1\nSurpassing the previous high before the halving event is an unprecedented occurrence in the Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s development history of the past decade.\nHowever, this cycle is not typical. This is because the previous high was relatively \u0026ldquo;low.\u0026rdquo; The difference of more than twice from the current value of around $30,000 to the previous high of $69,000 is remarkable. The introduction of a spot ETF could generate enough demand impact.\nIn a post on August 5th, Adam Back quoted an article from Cointelegraph, stating that \u0026ldquo;After the April 2024 halving, the price of Bitcoin needs to exceed $98,000 to prevent miners from operating at a loss\u0026rdquo; 2, and he made a calculation: If the network\u0026rsquo;s hash rate continues to grow at the rate of 6.3% per month as it did in the first half of 2023, it would reach 633 EH/s by April 2024. Currently, the fee income is about 0.16 BTC per block, in addition to the block reward of 3.285 BTC. This implies that a mining facility with a power consumption of 30 J/TH and an electricity cost of 6 cents per kWh would require a Bitcoin price of $58,000 to achieve breakeven.3\n$58,000 is the cost price. With a premium, exceeding the previous high of $69,000 and even surpassing $100,000 is not out of the realm of possibility. When compared to the current production cost of approximately $7,200 to $18,9004, the market price is currently almost $30,000.\nWhy is the market willing to pay such a high premium for miners? Just as Satoshi Nakamoto mentioned on a forum on February 21st, 2010, \u0026ldquo;This indicates that people estimate the present value to be higher than the current production cost.\u0026rdquo; The present value represents the discounted future expectations, and the higher the expectations for the future, the higher the discount.\nhttps://twitter.com/adam3us/status/1691799693943021978\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nhttps://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-miners-btc-price-98k-halving\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nhttps://twitter.com/adam3us/status/1687574440807153664\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nhttps://fortune.com/2023/07/08/bitcoin-miners-will-struggle-to-survive-halving-electricity-costs-debt-payments/\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/Reasons_for_BTC_Surpassing_100000_Before_the_2024_Halving.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eYesterday, Blockstream\u0026rsquo;s founder and renowned cryptographer Adam Back, in an interview with Bloomberg, mentioned that Bitcoin could potentially surpass $100,000 before the halving event in the first half of 2024.\u003csup id=\"fnref:1\"\u003e\u003ca href=\"#fn:1\" class=\"footnote-ref\" role=\"doc-noteref\"\u003e1\u003c/a\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" src=\"https://img.nickyam.com/file/81322d4e61303610296bb.png\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSurpassing the previous high before the halving event is an unprecedented occurrence in the Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s development history of the past decade.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Reasons for BTC Surpassing $100,000 Before the 2024 Halving"},{"content":"Friends familiar with the underlying mechanisms of Bitcoin are aware that on the Bitcoin blockchain ledger, it\u0026rsquo;s not individual bitcoins that are tracked, but rather individual Unspent Transaction Outputs (UTXOs). This technical term is referred to as \u0026ldquo;Unspent Transaction Output.\u0026rdquo; Some refer to these as \u0026ldquo;Bitcoin coins\u0026rdquo; or BTC coins.\nCurrently, there are approximately 130 million BTC coins recorded on the Bitcoin ledger.\nAn intriguing question is: How is the purchase price of these coins distributed? A research study from Glassnode provides some insights.\nFirst and foremost, it\u0026rsquo;s important to note that we cannot accurately determine the true purchase price of each UTXO. This is because a significant portion of UTXOs are traded on centralized exchanges, and obtaining transaction price data is quite challenging. One approach is to calculate the so-called \u0026ldquo;Realized Price,\u0026rdquo; which is based on the market price of BTC at the time the UTXO was generated. While this is not an exact transaction price, it does offer a certain perspective. By using this price to estimate the acquisition cost of all UTXOs and then plotting a distribution graph, the following figure is obtained.\nThe horizontal axis represents price, and the vertical axis represents coin balance (units: BTC). The blue indicates long-term holders, the red represents short-term holders, and the gray represents centralized exchanges.\nFrom this graph, it\u0026rsquo;s quite evident that these coins can be divided into three ranges:\nBelow $15,000: These UTXOs appear to have been dormant for a significant period. We know that once coins are moved, old coins are \u0026ldquo;destroyed\u0026rdquo; and new coins are \u0026ldquo;created.\u0026rdquo; Since BTC has not dipped below $15,000 since the previous cycle in 2020, these precious coins must have been generated before 2020. Those who firmly hold onto these coins are likely seasoned HODLers who have weathered market cycles.\nBased on historical data of this group\u0026rsquo;s behavior, they often cash out after BTC breaks its previous all-time high (ATH). So, if BTC is to surpass the previous high of $69,000, it could trigger the sale of these coins.\n$15,000 to $30,000: Within this range, there are both long-term holders and short-term traders. The current Bitcoin price is hovering around the upper boundary of this range.\nLong-term investors who continue to accumulate during this market cycle will persist with regular investments and buy the dips within this range, making them the strongest support during this bear market.\nSimilarly, this range is populated by traders lacking long-term conviction, engaging only in short-term profit-driven transactions.\nAs has been said, the former boosts the market floor, while the latter creates volatility.\nAbove $30,000: These are the bargain hunters who joined the market during the high points of the 2021 bull run. Among them are those who strategically positioned themselves for long-term investments, but there\u0026rsquo;s also a significant portion caught in speculative positions, reluctant to sell at a loss. Such positions can easily become resistance as Bitcoin moves from $30,000 to its previous high of $69,000. Their mindset often leans towards: \u0026ldquo;Hooray, after X years, I\u0026rsquo;ve finally broken even, let\u0026rsquo;s take profits and run!\u0026rdquo;\nAs they say, there are three rules for the novices: buy high, cut losses at the bottom, and sell once you\u0026rsquo;ve broken even.\nHowever, once the market surpasses this resistance range and breaks the previous high, it opens up an upward trajectory.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/Realized_Price_Distribution_of_BTC_Coins.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eFriends familiar with the underlying mechanisms of Bitcoin are aware that on the Bitcoin blockchain ledger, it\u0026rsquo;s not individual bitcoins that are tracked, but rather individual Unspent Transaction Outputs (UTXOs). This technical term is referred to as \u0026ldquo;Unspent Transaction Output.\u0026rdquo; Some refer to these as \u0026ldquo;Bitcoin coins\u0026rdquo; or BTC coins.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCurrently, there are approximately 130 million BTC coins recorded on the Bitcoin ledger.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAn intriguing question is: How is the purchase price of these coins distributed? A research study from Glassnode provides some insights.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Realized Price Distribution of BTC Coins"},{"content":"Overnight, Bitcoin continues to fluctuate above $29,000. The volatility index (30-day implied volatility of option prices) has further decreased, indicating exhaustion from both the bullish and bearish sides.\nAccording to reports, Bitcoin mining equipment manufacturers are shifting their focus from the saturated U.S. market to the mining market in Russia. Luxor Technologies, a mining infrastructure service provider, stated that more machines are flowing into Russia than any other place in the world.\nSince the setbacks in mid-2021, the total network hash rate of Bitcoin has experienced rapid growth.\nThis market seems to have a hint of supply economics: when the mining industry becomes an interest group, it promotes the sale of mining machines and mining businesses worldwide, continuously expanding the scale of mining and approaching the maximum mining capacity, which in turn drives the mining cost closer to the leading Bitcoin price.\nIf the purpose of production is to make money (capitalist production), then mining Bitcoin with mining machines is just one industry competing with many other categories of production. One boss, who may not even know about Bitcoin mining, might be mining coal. Another boss, though aware of Bitcoin mining, may struggle to buy enough mining machines and end up opening a restaurant. Selling mining machines to them at this time is empowering them with the ability to make money through another attractive means - Bitcoin mining.\nAs long as there is enough profit, businesses can achieve things beyond imagination. This is not the magic of business, but the result of mobilizing human subjectivity.\nJust as the story of selling a comb to a monk goes, with clever thinking, an excellent salesperson can sell anything to anyone.\nHenry Ford once made a good analogy by saying that before people saw cars, everyone wanted a faster horse.\nBefore having the ability to mine Bitcoin, every boss wanted to mine coal or open a restaurant.\nHowever, the way Satoshi Nakamoto designed Bitcoin mining made it different from the production of other industries. The mining cost of Bitcoin automatically adjusts with changes in hash power, ensuring that all participants in production receive a fixed total output in a unit of time, regardless of their input costs.\nIn theory, they should conspire together and collectively reduce hash power to lower mining costs. However, the prisoner\u0026rsquo;s dilemma game forces them to compete with each other, constantly increasing costs, improving mining technology, and seeking low-cost electricity to gain a competitive advantage over others.\nBecause mining machines, as hardware, wear out and need reproduction, and mining Bitcoin requires continuous consumption of massive electricity (OPEX), any existing leader cannot maintain a stable advantage and is always susceptible to being replaced by other strong competitors. This makes Bitcoin different from PoS mining projects, where token lock-up creates only fixed costs (CAPEX) and operating costs (OPEX) are low, allowing existing leaders to have an almost unbreakable advantage, forming a trust-like oligopoly or a cartel-like interest alliance.\nThis characteristic makes it impossible for Bitcoin production to experience the common practice of dumping in capitalist production, as we have seen in the textile industry or other industries, where excessive production floods the market with cheap goods, improving people\u0026rsquo;s lives. Because the production of Bitcoin is always constant, dumping mining machines cannot lead to excessive production of Bitcoin and subsequently dumping Bitcoin.\nIt can be seen that Bitcoin itself has inherent characteristics of anti-monopoly and anti-dumping, which naturally allows it to counteract the weaknesses of capitalist production and prevent Bitcoin prices from collapsing as a result (like pouring milk into the Mississippi River).\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/Supply-creates-demand.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eOvernight, Bitcoin continues to fluctuate above $29,000. The volatility index (30-day implied volatility of option prices) has further decreased, indicating exhaustion from both the bullish and bearish sides.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAccording to reports, Bitcoin mining equipment manufacturers are shifting their focus from the saturated U.S. market to the mining market in Russia. Luxor Technologies, a mining infrastructure service provider, stated that more machines are flowing into Russia than any other place in the world.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Supply creates demand"},{"content":"Overnight, the Federal Reserve\u0026rsquo;s July interest rate meeting released its outcome. Bitcoin remained unfazed and continued its path of recovery since July 25, experiencing a slight rebound to the $29.5k level.\nBefore the meeting, the market showed little volatility, possibly because the well-managed expectations were already fully digested and assimilated.\nFrom a technical perspective, a rate hike is negative, but the transition from the expectation of a rate hike to its actual implementation can turn it into a positive.\nFrom a macro standpoint, a rate hike is negative, but the end of the rate-hiking cycle can be understood as a positive.\nThe market doesn\u0026rsquo;t directly reflect positives or negatives; its reaction is determined by the difference between facts and expectations, combined with people\u0026rsquo;s subjective interpretations of that difference.\nThe end of the rate-hiking cycle. The Fed\u0026rsquo;s swan song.\nIn the FOMC statement, the Federal Reserve first emphasized the stability and resilience of the U.S. banking sector. The implicit message was that our banks can handle rate hikes without collapsing, so there\u0026rsquo;s no need to worry—of course, the underlying reason is the Fed\u0026rsquo;s unlimited \u0026ldquo;BTFP\u0026rdquo; (Backstop Treasury Facilities Program) as a safeguard. Following that, it was mentioned that credit tightening in real estate and business sectors has shown effects on economic activity, employment, and inflation. This statement acknowledges economic downturn, weak employment, and declining inflation. However, it was quickly added that the continuity of these effects remains uncertain. The committee still maintains a high level of vigilance concerning inflation risks. The final two sentences imply an unwillingness to give up the inflation card and readiness to play it at any time.\nThe subsequent paragraphs are the usual rhetoric. As expected by the market, a 25-basis-point rate hike was implemented, raising the federal funds rate to 5.25-5.5%.\nAs for the monthly reduction of $600 billion in U.S. treasuries and $350 billion in mortgage-backed securities (MBS), the pace remains unchanged. The approach is still to deduct the necessary reduction during reinvestment roll-off (no active \u0026ldquo;repurchasing\u0026rdquo; required).\nAs usual, Powell will hold a press conference after the meeting to explain the outcome. This is an essential method for guiding market thinking and implementing expectation management.\nKey points from Powell\u0026rsquo;s remarks: They can stop rate hikes before inflation reaches 2%. No rate cuts are expected this year. Core inflation remains high, so higher rates need to be maintained for some time. No decisions were made regarding future meetings, and there\u0026rsquo;s no plan to hike rates every other meeting. The impact of rate hikes hasn\u0026rsquo;t fully materialized, and future policy will be based on data.\nApart from preserving maximum decision-making flexibility for the Federal Reserve (as it\u0026rsquo;s never advisable to lock down the flexibility for future policy decisions in advance) and reiterating that rate cuts are not expected this year (as the market has already anticipated), Powell did express some dovish sentiments, admitting that there\u0026rsquo;s no need to keep hiking rates until inflation reaches the target of 2%.\nThe market\u0026rsquo;s expectations for the September interest rate meeting have been reflected, with nearly 80% expecting no rate hike and 20% expecting another 25 basis points increase.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/The-Feds-Swan-Song.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eOvernight, the Federal Reserve\u0026rsquo;s July interest rate meeting released its outcome. Bitcoin remained unfazed and continued its path of recovery since July 25, experiencing a slight rebound to the $29.5k level.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"The Fed’s Swan Song"},{"content":"Overnight, Bitcoin continues to hover above $29,000. Most likely, the Federal Reserve\u0026rsquo;s July interest rate meeting has commenced. Tomorrow, we should know the outcome, and the market is poised to make a decision.\nWhen it comes to cryptocurrencies, we talk about the concept of \u0026ldquo;Seigniorage,\u0026rdquo; which originates from the French term for feudal lords or princes. It refers to the profit gained from minting currency, which is the difference between the face value of the currency and its minting cost. For instance, if it costs 1 cent to produce a $1 bill, the seigniorage would be 99 cents.\nSeigniorage is not a tax; instead, it\u0026rsquo;s a special benefit, a revenue earned through issuing currency.\nWhen a regular commodity is produced, its price is determined by the balance between social supply capacity and overall consumer demand. However, when this commodity is used as a widely accepted medium of exchange and a store of value, people tend to hold onto it for transactions or store it for future use, increasing its demand and tightening its supply, leading to a value much higher than its regular commodity equilibrium price. Since the production cost remains low, the profit margin expands.\nWith paper money, the cost is even lower. It appears that the practical value can be separated from its added value, leaving only its exchange value and store of value functions, essentially making it pure currency. However, economists persistently discuss an erroneous belief that the value of money must stem from its practical utility.\nIn the United States, when the government issues debt to the market through the Treasury Department, and the Federal Reserve absorbs the debt from the market, the issuance of dollars is completed. By typing in a few numbers on the keyboard, trillions of dollars are created. In 2020, the Federal Reserve injected nearly one-fifth of the total amount of dollars issued in the past 200 years into the market within a year.\nThis debt-based currency issuance method benefits the first receivers of the newly created dollars, those who take on the debt, by enjoying the excess value generated by seigniorage.\nIn our country, the government cannot directly raise debt in this manner and have the central bank engage in quantitative easing by printing money. The group that incurs massive debt benefits first, enjoying the seigniorage. In recent decades, the real estate market has been a market that enjoys this special benefit.\nWhen you take out a loan to buy a house, the bank increases its liability by creating new money on the asset side using the mortgage property and provides it to the real estate developer. You act as raw material for the bank\u0026rsquo;s currency creation, but the newly created money is divided among the developers and other entities in the industry chain.\nCryptocurrencies like altcoins create new quasi-currencies through stories or cheap collateralization and reserve a large portion of near-zero-cost initial currency for themselves before issuing it to the market, thus extracting significant excess seigniorage from the market. For example, if a token is priced at $1 and 100 billion coins are issued, with 10% going to the project team and venture capitalists, they directly enjoy seigniorage worth 1 billion dollars.\nThe gold industry is a highly resource-consuming sector. Gold mining incurs tremendous costs and comes at the expense of environmental pollution to extract gold from the earth\u0026rsquo;s crust. As a result, gold mining companies enjoy seigniorage, but it is merely a modest profit after deducting the high costs from the market price.\nBitcoin is different from the US dollar, real estate, and altcoins. It is somewhat similar to gold in that it is directly issued to miners at high mining costs, allowing miners to reap the seigniorage. Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s mining costs usually make up 50% to 100% of its market price, making the seigniorage a reward directly given to those who contribute to the Bitcoin system\u0026rsquo;s operation. It can be generous or meager, driven by fierce market competition and elimination.\nFurthermore, Bitcoin miners\u0026rsquo; income consists of two parts: a portion comes from the newly added Bitcoin in each block, and the other part is transaction fees paid by users for processing transactions in the block. The second part is a free-market-priced income for transaction services and does not include seigniorage. Only the first part of newly added Bitcoin contains seigniorage. As Satoshi Nakamoto said many years ago, \u0026ldquo;Coins have to get initially distributed somehow.\u0026rdquo; It\u0026rsquo;s just that some ways are relatively fairer, while others may not be as fair.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/Bitcoin-Minting-Tax.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eOvernight, Bitcoin continues to hover above $29,000. Most likely, the Federal Reserve\u0026rsquo;s July interest rate meeting has commenced. Tomorrow, we should know the outcome, and the market is poised to make a decision.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Bitcoin Minting Tax"},{"content":"Overnight, Bitcoin experienced slight fluctuations around $30,000, while UNI steadily rose and is now close to $6.\nDuring the Sunday private board meeting, a member asked about the comparison between Uniswap (UNI) and Arbitrum (ARB). Both projects are undoubtedly of high quality, otherwise, the comparative analysis would be meaningless.\nIn terms of tokenomics, Uniswap will complete its unlock in the next two years [1], while Arbitrum has just started [2]. Their distribution models are almost identical:\nTeam + VCs: 40% (UNI) vs. 44.4% (ARB)\nDAO (Community): 43% (UNI) vs. 42.8% (ARB)\nInitial airdrop: 15% (UNI) vs. 12.7% (ARB, including 11.6% personal user airdrop + 1.1% ecosystem project donations)\nRegarding business maturity, Uniswap still firmly holds its position as the leading DEX and continues to consolidate its leadership. Its commitment to decentralization enhances its anti-fragility. Currently, Arbitrum leads the L2 track, but other L2 solutions, such as the more established Optimism, are fiercely competing, and there\u0026rsquo;s also a possibility of zk technology disrupting the optimistic track (although Arbitrum can pivot with sufficient capital). L2 bridging still faces significant centralization control issues .\nUniswap certainly offers more certainty, while Arbitrum has greater uncertainty (which is not necessarily a bad thing, as uncertainty implies growth potential).\nIn terms of development potential, some view Uniswap as just another DEX on Ethereum, while Arbitrum is a fundamental layer (according to Ethereum\u0026rsquo;s development strategy, L2\u0026rsquo;s importance will increase over time). However, Uniswap acts as a user gateway and has the opportunity to span across all chains, becoming a \u0026ldquo;super gateway\u0026rdquo; (reminiscent of the importance of gateways in the internet era). Even with UniswapX, gas fees from various underlying chains (including L1 and L2) will be \u0026ldquo;shielded,\u0026rdquo; allowing users to transparently accept UniswapX\u0026rsquo;s global scheduling without perceiving the individual chains. On the other hand, Arbitrum serves as an ecological infrastructure, allowing various applications to run on it. However, based on industry development history, trading is the most significant and inflexible demand (as evident from the market position and profitability of centralized exchanges).\nNevertheless, fundamentally evaluating a project comes down to its ability to continuously solve problems. This is something that 99% of people would agree with. However, My insight is that the ability to ask the right questions is even more critical.\nTraditional education is about limited proposition contests, which are already challenging. Technological innovation involves open proposition contests, which are even more difficult. If the only requirement is the ability to solve problems, how can a team of three to five people compete with well-funded, well-staffed, well-educated, well-connected, and well-resourced giants or star teams?\nIf the sole capability is to develop a payment system, how could Satoshi Nakamoto, a single individual, create a product that surpasses the payment platforms produced by large corporations?\nBitcoin\u0026rsquo;s success is attributed to the fact that Satoshi Nakamoto asked a fundamentally different question: How to create a decentralized payment system? To answer and solve this question, a completely different set of skills and even consciousness is required. This led to Satoshi Nakamoto forging a unique path while the giants continued along a conventional route.\nHence, when evaluating projects, it\u0026rsquo;s crucial to observe the team\u0026rsquo;s ability to consistently ask the right questions. Without asking the right questions, no matter how much funding or how illustrious the lineup, be it 996 or 007, it will all be in vain.\nThe Uniswap team demonstrates the ability to continuously ask the right questions. This is evident from their transition from Uniswap V2 to V3.\nIt took one year between Uniswap V2\u0026rsquo;s launch in the second quarter of 2020 and V3\u0026rsquo;s launch. During this year, numerous copycats and forks of Uniswap flooded the market, but none proposed increasing liquidity efficiency by truncating the range while maintaining the xy=k formula. It wasn\u0026rsquo;t until the introduction of Uniswap V3 that people realized this innovation. Uniswap came from behind. This is the advantage their ability to ask the right questions brought.\nAs this year unfolds, both V4 and X demonstrate that the Uniswap team\u0026rsquo;s depth of understanding of problems remains unchanged. This instills confidence in us as we navigate through market fluctuations.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/The_Scarcer_Ability_Asking_the_Right_Questions.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eOvernight, Bitcoin experienced slight fluctuations around $30,000, while UNI steadily rose and is now close to $6.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDuring the Sunday private board meeting, a member asked about the comparison between Uniswap (UNI) and Arbitrum (ARB). Both projects are undoubtedly of high quality, otherwise, the comparative analysis would be meaningless.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"The Scarcer Ability , Asking the Right Questions"},{"content":"Overnight, Bitcoin slightly dipped below $30,000 but quickly rebounded, currently sliding along the $30,000 mark.\nA discussion about the entry barrier for cryptocurrency investment has sparked a debate in the overseas crypto community. It began when a newcomer asked a prominent figure how someone with just a few thousand dollars could start investing in crypto. Should they invest in Bitcoin, Ethereum, meme coins, or altcoins that outperform Bitcoin? Is it reliable?\nThe prominent figure responded succinctly: \u0026ldquo;Go find a job.\u0026rdquo;\nWhy? As mentioned in the previous \u0026ldquo;Earnings ability is the best alpha\u0026rdquo; article.\nThe conversation seemed to be on track until another KOL, a former partner at a crypto fund, made a statement that stirred the waters.\nHe stated that you might need over $10 million USD to quit your job and independently start investing. Perhaps you could survive with less money, but your safety margin would decrease. It\u0026rsquo;s better to work while investing.\nThe $10 million USD entry barrier indeed caused a sensation. Especially considering that a few years ago, there was a statistic claiming over 600 million Chinese people earned less than 1,000 RMB per month.\nFor someone like me, who can\u0026rsquo;t even spare 1,000 RMB per month, talking about a $10 million USD entry seems out of reach.\nHowever, the individual clarified that this is the standard for full-time independent investment. For most newcomers, it\u0026rsquo;s best to focus on earning money through work.\nTurning 1,000 RMB into 2,000 RMB might require a 100% investment return, which is difficult for many newcomers to achieve.\nBut increasing your off-work earnings is relatively easier. It\u0026rsquo;s like raising your monthly income from 1,000 RMB to 2,000 RMB, which is not as challenging.\nThus, when your capital is limited, it\u0026rsquo;s not worth quitting your job to invest full-time in cryptocurrencies. Small capital means higher risk, and high leverage can lead to liquidation. Profits might not be significant, and it would consume a significant amount of energy, resulting in more losses than gains.\nThe best strategy at this point is as follows: focus on improving your earning ability and skills outside of the crypto market.\nMany investors in the crypto community quit their jobs early to trade full-time. However, this might not be the best approach.\nBut does one truly need over $10 million USD as an independent investor?\nThe key lies in financial independence. According to the FIRE (Financial Independence, Retire Early) theory, as long as your assets exceed 4% of your living expenses, you can consider yourself financially independent and retire early.\nFor example, if your total annual expenses are $200,000, you would need assets of $5 million to achieve FIRE.\nEven if you\u0026rsquo;re fully committed to crypto investment, it doesn\u0026rsquo;t mean you should engage in it non-stop. Often, the more you trade, the fewer profits you make, and you might accidentally fall into the harvesting range designed by predators.\nIf you treat crypto investment as a professional endeavor, it may require a high entry barrier. However, if you view it as a wealth management tool, don\u0026rsquo;t dismiss it just because your initial capital is small. Wealth management often requires an early start and consistent efforts to accumulate results over time.\nWe believe that the power of crypto lies in making finance more inclusive. Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s vision is not about the mutual exploitation among a few wealthy individuals. The true strength comes from widespread adoption, allowing even the poor to participate and benefit from it, which is the true source of currency\u0026rsquo;s new power.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/Dont_Do_Cryptocurrency_Investments_Without_10_Million_Dollars.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eOvernight, Bitcoin slightly dipped below $30,000 but quickly rebounded, currently sliding along the $30,000 mark.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA discussion about the entry barrier for cryptocurrency investment has sparked a debate in the overseas crypto community. It began when a newcomer asked a prominent figure how someone with just a few thousand dollars could start investing in crypto. Should they invest in Bitcoin, Ethereum, meme coins, or altcoins that outperform Bitcoin? Is it reliable?\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Don't Do Cryptocurrency Investments Without 10 Million Dollars"},{"content":"Overnight, Bitcoin remains above $30,000, maintaining its consolidation for the 25th day since June 23rd.\nWhat is the key to successful investment? Many have witnessed people abandoning beta (average returns) in pursuit of alpha (excess returns), selling Bitcoin for meme coins, only to end up not outperforming the market and suffering significant losses. While some courageous individuals may regroup and start again, others might become disheartened and exit the market.\nWhether Bitcoin serves as the beta for the cryptocurrency market depends on your worldview. If Bitcoin is considered the beta, then alpha would mean outperforming Bitcoin.\nIf we take a certain index representing the cryptocurrency market (with or without Bitcoin) as the beta, the first question is whether this index can consistently outperform Bitcoin. If not, holding Bitcoin would naturally provide risk-free alpha. If it can, then we need to revisit why some investments fail to outpace Bitcoin.\nMany have tried numerous methods to achieve alpha over Bitcoin, such as buying altcoins, chasing memes, leveraging, trading contracts, and more. However, only a few have succeeded, and most end up with minimal gains or even losses. It becomes a zero-sum or negative-sum game, where success is not true investment success but rather survivorship bias.\nIn my view, the ultimate winning alpha is the ability to consistently make money. If you excel at working, then your job income is your best alpha. If you have your own business, then the profits from it are your best alpha. If you are a landlord, the rental income is your best alpha. In short, the ability to generate income is the best alpha.\nWarren Buffett\u0026rsquo;s Berkshire Hathaway sticks to acquiring and controlling businesses with good fundamentals, allowing these subsidiaries to continuously generate profits. Through control, they become Buffett\u0026rsquo;s cash cows. Without control, Buffett might become a victim. Ownership makes a world of difference in the value game.\nMichael Saylor\u0026rsquo;s MicroStrategy (MSTR) creatively accumulates Bitcoin in various ways, amassing tens of thousands of coins. More importantly, MicroStrategy not only holds Bitcoin but also operates a software business that generates continuous cash flow, sustaining their Bitcoin accumulation without management fees.\nThe \u0026ldquo;Eight Characters\u0026rdquo; investment strategy involves not just buying more, but a complete set of investment principles. \u0026ldquo;From Investment Novice to Financial Freedom\u0026rdquo; advocates holding Bitcoin while earning money and investing idle funds for the long term.\nAvoid getting trapped in a zero-sum game because if you cannot ensure you\u0026rsquo;re the reaper, you\u0026rsquo;ll likely become the crop.\nFurthermore, steer clear of negative-sum games, as all participants in such games end up as fish on the chopping board.\nWhen you buy a coin, you\u0026rsquo;re participating in a game designed by someone else. Before joining any game, make sure to understand its nature.\nIf your limited knowledge prevents you from seeing through the essence of the game, it\u0026rsquo;s best to stay away. Most of the time, not losing is winning, and not losing means not decreasing your Bitcoin holdings.\nTrading your earning ability for steady growth in Bitcoin holdings is unassailable, ensuring a prosperous and enduring journey.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/Earning_Ability_is_the_Best_Alpha.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eOvernight, Bitcoin remains above $30,000, maintaining its consolidation for the 25th day since June 23rd.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhat is the key to successful investment? Many have witnessed people abandoning beta (average returns) in pursuit of alpha (excess returns), selling Bitcoin for meme coins, only to end up not outperforming the market and suffering significant losses. While some courageous individuals may regroup and start again, others might become disheartened and exit the market.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Earning Ability is the Best Alpha"},{"content":"Overnight, Bitcoin continues to consolidate above the 30k level. Looking at the weekly chart, the previous day\u0026rsquo;s court ruling regarding XRP, which obtained a 2/3 non-security designation, turned out to be a mere \u0026ldquo;show of empty positivity.\u0026rdquo; It further depleted the market\u0026rsquo;s strength and brought everything back to square one, continuing the trend of slight decline. Short-term speculators have been repeatedly washed out, while long-term hodlers are unable to sell. Market liquidity is drying up, yet there is a lack of substantial catalysts for a significant change, resulting in the current awkward situation.\nRegarding the harvesting of the US dollar in the global circulation, there are additional explanations in the internal reference material. Due to the Cantillon effect, every round of the circulation cycle brings pain to the world where liquidity is destroyed, while the United States emerges as the winner, gaining fresh dollars. The key issue is that all of this is man-made, not natural.\nIn the cycle of US dollar circulation, what is the position of Bitcoin? Does it belong to the world or to the United States? How does it benefit or suffer at the beginning and end of the expansionary cycle, and at the beginning and end of the contractionary cycle?\nThe Federal Reserve is the source of liquidity. The liquidity injected by the Federal Reserve flows into the United States through various channels and then spreads to the rest of the world. The United States can be seen as a small pond, while the world represents a larger reservoir. Of course, due to the United States\u0026rsquo; position as the world\u0026rsquo;s largest economy, its pond holds a significant share compared to the rest of the world.\nHow does the Federal Reserve create liquidity? Through the Treasury Department. The Treasury Department issues debt, and the Federal Reserve provides liquidity by injecting money into the system. This is the mechanism for issuing debt-based US dollars.\nAt the beginning of an expansionary cycle, institutions that have access to US dollars go on a buying spree worldwide. Asset prices soar, surpassing the performance of the US stock market. The US stock market, however, faces pressure due to capital outflows.\nTowards the end of the expansionary cycle, global asset prices have become inflated, and the US stock market has experienced significant gains. Excessive liquidity floods the entire world. It\u0026rsquo;s a moment of celebration for asset prices, and everyone believes in an eternal bull market.\nAt this point, the Federal Reserve begins to taper its liquidity injections, as it did towards the end of 2021.\nAt the beginning of a tightening cycle, not everyone realizes the situation immediately, and the impact of interest rate hikes directly affects the global economy. No matter how strong the leverage appears, it can be broken by high interest rates. The world experiences a synchronized deleveraging process, leading to a sharp decline in asset prices.\nAt the end of a tightening cycle, due to the siphoning effect created by the pump (Federal Reserve) on the global pool, the outflow from the world pool actually has a certain regenerative effect on US assets, such as the US stock market. The market exhibits a divergence, with the world experiencing a challenging environment while the US maintains its favorable position.\nFurthermore, we have seen in the events that unfolded at the beginning of 2023 that the entire system is subject to significant human intervention. When the Federal Reserve failed to control the outflow of water and encountered stubborn players in the global pool, the water drawn was insufficient to support the bleeding of the US capital market, resulting in the collapse of the US banking industry. In such a situation, what could be done? The intertwined nature of the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department within this system became evident. Powell and Yellen swiftly took action, jointly expanding the balance sheet and providing targeted liquidity injections to the US banking system. Additionally, the Federal Reserve quickly introduced the \u0026ldquo;BTFP\u0026rdquo; tool, a nuclear-level instrument that provided full endorsement to the US banking system through central bank credit.\nWithout delving into the causes and manipulations behind these facts, what we want to explore is which pool Bitcoin, as a new category of asset, will float in: the United States or the entire world?\nIf Bitcoin floats in the US pool, it would exhibit a pattern of initial decline during the expansion phase, a surge at the end of the expansion, a sharp decline at the beginning of the contraction, and a rise at the end of the contraction.\nIf Bitcoin floats in the global pool, it would follow a tide of rise, rise, fall, fall in accordance with the US dollar cycle (please note that the order we discuss here is expansion-contraction, which is reverse to the order discussed on Twitter, contraction-expansion).\nCurrently, we are at the end of the contraction phase, with the world still experiencing the painful scarcity of liquidity, while the US stock market has already displayed a vibrant scene of prosperity. As for Bitcoin, it has long emerged from the swamp of $16k in December 2022, crossing the watershed of $30k. However, Bitcoin is not as favorable as the US stock market. Bitcoin is half in the US and half in the world.\nPerhaps this is why the CEO of BlackRock, Larry Fink, has been emphasizing that Bitcoin is international. It is neither American nor foreign—it is international.\nIf the Bitcoin spot ETF, which provides access to the US financial capital market, is approved and listed, connecting the pipeline of Bitcoin with the flow of water from the US pool, it would undoubtedly subject Bitcoin to greater buoyancy from the US pool.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/Bitcoin_during_the_bear_market.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eOvernight, Bitcoin continues to consolidate above the 30k level. Looking at the weekly chart, the previous day\u0026rsquo;s court ruling regarding XRP, which obtained a 2/3 non-security designation, turned out to be a mere \u0026ldquo;show of empty positivity.\u0026rdquo; It further depleted the market\u0026rsquo;s strength and brought everything back to square one, continuing the trend of slight decline. Short-term speculators have been repeatedly washed out, while long-term hodlers are unable to sell. Market liquidity is drying up, yet there is a lack of substantial catalysts for a significant change, resulting in the current awkward situation.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Bitcoin during the bear market"},{"content":"Overnight, BTC continues to consolidate above 30k. It\u0026rsquo;s a garbage time for traders but a golden time for hodlers. The longer it consolidates, the more fear it instills in many people. The more afraid they become, the less inclined they are to accumulate more or even consider reducing their holdings for safety. There is a superstitious saying among technical analysis enthusiasts, \u0026ldquo;Consolidation leads to a drop.\u0026rdquo; Jiao Chain doesn\u0026rsquo;t understand this saying. Drop? In which direction will it drop? If that\u0026rsquo;s the case, wouldn\u0026rsquo;t a 1/BTC candlestick chart indicate a rise after prolonged consolidation? It shows that technical analysis, if not entirely useless, is at least largely ineffective.\nSome may scoff and ask: If technical analysis is useless, does that mean we should focus on value investing? Well, let\u0026rsquo;s hear your opinion. What value does BTC have?\nTo answer the question of \u0026ldquo;What value does BTC have?\u0026rdquo;, we must first ask a more fundamental question: What is value?\nEssentially, the answers to this question constitute the entire field of economics. Different answers and the supporting theories form different economic schools of thought. However, we won\u0026rsquo;t delve into the profound and abstract economic theories here. Jiao Chain simply wants to share some brief thoughts and understanding on this question.\nFirstly, in the most basic language, when we say that something has value to someone, we mean that it is beneficial to their interests. For example, bread has value to Zhang San because eating it can alleviate hunger, or Zhang San can sell the bread and make money. Similarly, Xiao Li has value to Lao Wang because Xiao Li can take care of Lao Wang\u0026rsquo;s daily needs, or Xiao Li can work for Lao Wang and help him sell products to earn money.\nThe ability to be eaten and taken care of, such as bread and Xiao Li\u0026rsquo;s services, constitutes non-economic value. The ability to be sold or exchanged, such as bread being sold for money or Xiao Li earning money, constitutes economic value. Some economic schools refer to non-economic value as \u0026ldquo;use value\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;practical value,\u0026rdquo; and economic value as \u0026ldquo;exchange value.\u0026rdquo; However, can\u0026rsquo;t we consider the value of Lao Wang employing Xiao Li as a form of use value? Therefore, the value derived from Lao Wang\u0026rsquo;s employment of Xiao Li can also be called use value. It\u0026rsquo;s evident that the ambiguity of language often confuses people. No wonder Ludwig Wittgenstein said that language is the limit of human reason.\nSome economic schools focus on non-economic value and discover the principle of diminishing marginal utility. However, this principle doesn\u0026rsquo;t hold true for economic value. Eating bread can satisfy hunger, and non-economic value diminishes or disappears as it is satisfied. However, no one would complain about having too much money. People\u0026rsquo;s pursuit of economic value is insatiable, and there is no diminishing marginal utility in this context.\nDeep down, humans tend to prioritize economic value over non-economic value, even though, ironically, all economic value must ultimately be tied to some form of non-economic value, or else it devolves into financial speculation. In a family, the person who works full-time at home often receives less recognition, while the one who goes out to work and earns money often has a higher status. In a company, those involved in product technology often have less say, while the top-performing salesperson who directly generates revenue can influence major decisions. In a country, the hardworking lower-class people have little social status, while the idle capitalist players suffering from depression are listed on the rich list and admired by the world.\nSecondly, economic value is highly regarded because we need to benefit others. What does it mean to benefit others? It means enabling someone to gain value. Why do we benefit others? The fundamental reason is that we have needs that can only be fulfilled by others.\nI have five pieces of bread. After eating three pieces, I am no longer hungry. The remaining two pieces have no non-economic value to me. Overall, the value of three pieces of bread is reduced to zero.\nBut if I give the remaining two pieces of bread to Xiao Wang, he eats them and is no longer hungry. The two pieces of bread regain their non-economic value in Xiao Wang\u0026rsquo;s hands. The entire \u0026ldquo;society\u0026rdquo; realizes the value of all five pieces of bread (non-economic value) collectively.\nLet\u0026rsquo;s denote non-economic value as vn and economic value as ve.\nIn the case of me eating the bread, it contributes overall: vn(three pieces of bread) = vn(3).\nIn the case of Xiao Wang and me eating the bread together, it contributes overall: vn(three pieces of bread) + vn(two pieces of bread) = vn(3) + vn(2) = vn(5). Sharing maximizes the non-economic value of the bread.\nHowever, this kind of gratuitous sharing is limited to a network of acquaintances or even family. In primitive tribal societies, it could extend to a tribe or a few neighboring tribes at most. If we want to share on a larger scale, it becomes impossible because we cannot guarantee that others will not become selfish individuals who only take without giving.\nThus, if Xiao Wang and I are not related, I would have to exchange the two pieces of bread for something he has that I need. The common medium\nof exchange we use today is currency.\nOnce economic exchange occurs, the bread gains an additional layer of economic value, ve. Overall, it contributes: vn(three pieces of bread) + ve(two pieces of bread) + vn(two pieces of bread) = vn(3) + ve(2) + vn(2) = v(7).\nCan we simply add vn(3) and ve(2) together? Mathematically, we cannot directly add values with different dimensions. However, psychologically, we can add them together. I feel that I have gained the total value of five pieces of bread (although I have confused non-economic value with economic value, as mentioned earlier).\nThe creation of ve(2) value through economic exchange represents the indebtedness of society to the recipient of the currency. This value is only realized when, at some future time, you can exchange the currency equivalent to ve(2) for something you desire. This is the logic behind the dominant debt-based monetary system in today\u0026rsquo;s world. The US dollar is the largest and most widely used debt-based currency globally.\nWhat if we didn\u0026rsquo;t use debt-based currency? Instead, we used dried fish as a medium of exchange equivalent to ve(2). In this case, I would exchange for a tangible value: the actual N dried fish I receive represents a combination of the non-economic value I derive from eating them and the economic value of being able to trade them for the goods I need from others.\nBitcoin is that dried fish—never decaying, easily divisible, easily identifiable, and can be sent via the Internet—a better form of dried fish.\nRegardless, our willingness to engage in exchange and maximize value is not due to our kindness or pure altruism, but because we are interdependent and need each other to fulfill our needs.\nThirdly, merely needing each other is not enough; there must also be clear and inalienable ownership rights. Ownership and property rights are closely related to sovereignty.\nHumans have a need for pigs (to eat pork), but they don\u0026rsquo;t engage in economic exchange with pigs. In the novel \u0026ldquo;Journey to the West,\u0026rdquo; monsters have a need to eat humans, but they also don\u0026rsquo;t engage in economic exchange with humans most of the time.\nWhen you lose ownership rights over yourself, you lose sovereignty; when you lose ownership rights over your property, you lose property rights. When you lose sovereignty and property rights, you also lose the value of exchanging with others.\nWe are not just talking about personal ownership, such as the advocacy of \u0026ldquo;personal sovereignty.\u0026rdquo; Individual power is too weak when faced with organized groups or powerful Leviathans, making it unable to defend itself. Therefore, modern individuals must rely on the protection of the state to safeguard their ownership rights and engage in fair trade on that foundation.\nFrom the moment the first human picked up a tree branch or a stone from the ground and used it as a weapon, they established ownership over that branch or stone through their labor. This acquisition of ownership is natural.\nBecause another person cannot violently seize the branch or stone from his hand, they must offer something else they own in exchange. Ownership rights emerge from this exchange.\nBitcoin ensures that your private keys are your coins through cryptography and powerful computational power. No matter how powerful an individual or organization may be, they cannot seize your coins from you. Only in this way can your ownership of Bitcoin be a truly secure right.\nWhen ownership is lost, economic exchange ceases to exist.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/What_is_value.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eOvernight, BTC continues to consolidate above 30k. It\u0026rsquo;s a garbage time for traders but a golden time for hodlers. The longer it consolidates, the more fear it instills in many people. The more afraid they become, the less inclined they are to accumulate more or even consider reducing their holdings for safety. There is a superstitious saying among technical analysis enthusiasts, \u0026ldquo;Consolidation leads to a drop.\u0026rdquo; Jiao Chain doesn\u0026rsquo;t understand this saying. Drop? In which direction will it drop? If that\u0026rsquo;s the case, wouldn\u0026rsquo;t a 1/BTC candlestick chart indicate a rise after prolonged consolidation? It shows that technical analysis, if not entirely useless, is at least largely ineffective.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"What is value?"},{"content":"If you followed the investment advice of the BlackRock CEO and went long on Bitcoin yesterday, you would have probably learned your lesson from the market today. Today, let\u0026rsquo;s take a look at how Levermore, more than a hundred years ago, fell victim to trusting the views of the big shots and ended up losing money.\nWe all know that in most fields, to excel at something, you need guidance from experts and masters, often needing to follow their instructions completely. You seek a doctor when you\u0026rsquo;re sick, a lawyer when you\u0026rsquo;re dealing with legal matters, and a mechanic when your car breaks down.\nBut in the investment industry, this rule doesn\u0026rsquo;t apply. Investing is not like seeking medical treatment, fighting a legal battle, or fixing a car; authority and experience don\u0026rsquo;t necessarily equate to being correct. Even today\u0026rsquo;s stock market legends like Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger cannot predict the past and future of Bitcoin.\nBuffett expressed doubts about Bitcoin as early as 2014 in an interview, stating, \u0026ldquo;Personally, I would stay away from it. I would never have anything to do with it. I would not encourage it. I would not believe it. It\u0026rsquo;s a mirage basically.\u0026rdquo;\nIf you were an early Bitcoin investor in 2014 and followed the advice of the world\u0026rsquo;s most successful investor, you would have probably left the cryptocurrency market long ago, missing out on many opportunities to make money. In 2018, Buffett reiterated his negative views on Bitcoin at the Berkshire Hathaway annual shareholders meeting, calling it \u0026ldquo;rat poison\u0026rdquo; and stating that it has no intrinsic value.\nAnother partner of his, Charlie Munger, vehemently criticized cryptocurrencies, referring to investors as \u0026ldquo;idiots\u0026rdquo; and calling investing in Bitcoin extremely foolish.\nI have witnessed many similar real-life examples around me. For instance, someone in 2017 intended to buy Bitcoin after listening to my audio, but then they heard a famous economist, Lang Xianping, saying Bitcoin was worthless and a typical Ponzi scheme, just like the Tulip Mania. So, they unquestioningly believed this economist\u0026rsquo;s words and missed out on the significant bull market of 2017.\nThere are many similar examples. Even if you are the CEO of a listed company or the founder of a particular cryptocurrency, holding all the information about your company, or even a Nobel laureate in economics who understands the principles of economic operations, you may not necessarily make money in the investment market. That\u0026rsquo;s because the market has its own logic, and if you think you can make money simply by relying on bull markets and advice from big shots, or by relying on so-called insider information, you are simply daydreaming.\nLevermore suffered bankruptcy because of relying too much on the views of authority figures. In 1907, Levermore made a fortune by shorting cotton futures, earning him the title of the new \u0026ldquo;Cotton King.\u0026rdquo; At that time, the well-established \u0026ldquo;Cotton King\u0026rdquo; Thomas invited him to meet and proposed collaboration. Thomas, who had been in the cotton market for many years, was famous among cotton traders worldwide, much like Vitalik Buterin in the cryptocurrency world today.\nEven though Levermore was already quite capable, he approached Thomas like a fan meeting an idol. However, their views on the future trend of cotton futures were opposite. In Levermore\u0026rsquo;s eyes, Thomas was intelligent and sincere, treating him like a friend. So, he decided to change his trading strategy, thinking that Thomas must know better. As a result, he lost all the millions of dollars he had previously made, adding another chapter of personal bankruptcy.\nThis shows that while experts and authorities can provide advice, they won\u0026rsquo;t take responsibility for your wallet. If you blindly trust authority figures, you will lose your own judgment. Even if you make money, you won\u0026rsquo;t know how you made it, and you might end up losing even more.\nNow that we understand that we shouldn\u0026rsquo;t listen to authorities, let\u0026rsquo;s discuss whether we can rely on insider information. People often say that the capital market is a battlefield of information, where information represents opportunities and money. For example, if a small token has significant positive news, its price will rise. If you can access that information before it\u0026rsquo;s publicly announced, you can buy in advance and wait to make money, right? The reality is quite different.\nLet\u0026rsquo;s not even consider that using insider information for profit is illegal in today\u0026rsquo;s compliant financial markets, which can result in fines and imprisonment. Even in times when insider trading was not illegal, Levermore refused to listen to any hearsay or inside rumors. Even if a friend told him the news sincerely, even if the friend put all his assets on the line, there was no guarantee that the information was reliable.\nWhy is that? Firstly, the insider information you receive is likely to be false. If a stock has good news, why would someone spreading the news not keep it to themselves and make a significant profit? There are often internal interest groups in the market that spread malicious false information, aiming to sell stocks at inflated prices to small and medium-sized investors. Some people still believe it and bet their fortune.\nSecondly, even if the information is true, it\u0026rsquo;s difficult to profit from it when you receive it. For example, when a company\u0026rsquo;s business performance improves, and its revenue increases, insiders will know this earlier. However, will they immediately release the good news? Insiders will withhold positive news, waiting to buy enough shares before announcing it, so they can profit from it.\nThirdly, insiders will only tell you when to buy, but they won\u0026rsquo;t tell you when to sell. Whether it\u0026rsquo;s true or false news, whether you find out early or late, you still rely on others without having your own method of making money. Even if you make money in the short term, you will lose it in the long run.\nLevermore himself did not listen to insider information, but his wife fell victim to it. The president of a company, pretending to be mysterious, told Levermore\u0026rsquo;s wife that their company had significant positive news, and the stock would definitely rise. He claimed to only share this information with her because he respected her. He expected Levermore\u0026rsquo;s wife to tell her husband. With the financial resources and influence of the \u0026ldquo;Stock Market Guru,\u0026rdquo; the stock price would rise even higher, and he could benefit from it. However, his plan went wrong. Levermore\u0026rsquo;s wife had just made a small fortune and wanted to make some extra money without her husband knowing. Unfortunately, within a few days, she lost all the money, and that\u0026rsquo;s when she had to tell her husband. Levermore couldn\u0026rsquo;t help but cry and laugh because it was the same stock he had shorted, and he had already predicted a major decline.\nIt seems that this is the difference between the stock market guru\u0026rsquo;s wife and the stock market guru himself. One listens to authority and insider information, while the other only trusts their own judgment.\nSo, today, the two market trading rules we discussed are lessons and teachings that Levermore summarized more than a hundred years ago. If we can understand this principle earlier, we can at least avoid some detours. Alright, let\u0026rsquo;s continue our discussion tomorrow to uncover the fatal mistakes that led to Levermore\u0026rsquo;s final failure and his inability to turn things around.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/What_kind_of_mistakes_should_never_be_made_in_the_cryptocurrency_market.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eIf you followed the investment advice of the BlackRock CEO and went long on Bitcoin yesterday, you would have probably learned your lesson from the market today.  Today, let\u0026rsquo;s take a look at how Levermore, more than a hundred years ago, fell victim to trusting the views of the big shots and ended up losing money.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"What kind of mistakes should never be made in the cryptocurrency market?"},{"content":"Often, friends struggle to determine the target amount when formulating a long-term investment plan. Some friends, with lower incomes, find it difficult to imagine owning 1 BTC, which is valued at around $30,000 or over 200,000 RMB. On the other hand, friends with more wealth feel that buying a few BTC doesn\u0026rsquo;t seem satisfying enough.\nIn my opinion, it might be helpful to consider your current net worth relative to the global population of 8 billion people when estimating how much BTC you should hold. This approach allows you to maintain your wealth position without it diminishing.\nWe owe this to Bitcoin, which provides a fairer measure of wealth. Its design, with a limited supply and inability for arbitrary inflation, ensures that the wealth stored in Bitcoin form doesn\u0026rsquo;t passively erode, thereby safeguarding your financial position.\nAccording to statistical data on the global distribution of personal wealth in 2021, only 62.5 million individuals (0.89% of the world population) possess a net worth of $1 million or more, forming the elite class at the top of the wealth pyramid. If we hypothetically divide the 21 million BTC equally among these 62.5 million individuals, each person would only have about 0.336 BTC. However, considering factors such as unreleased BTC, lost BTC, and uneven distribution, the amount held by the last individual in the elite class would be significantly smaller.\nEven if we consider the conservative estimate of 0.336 BTC, the total cost at the current price of $30.5k would be a little over $10,000 or around 70,000 RMB. This means that by spending less than 100,000 RMB today, you can achieve a wealth position equivalent to a net worth of one million US dollars, as measured by Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s global wealth scale.\nIf you believe that in your target timeframe, let\u0026rsquo;s say 20 or 30 years from now, Bitcoin can only measure a fraction of global wealth, you can introduce a percentage to calculate accordingly. For example, if Bitcoin were to grow to 10% of the global wealth in 20-30 years, the previously mentioned estimate of 0.336 BTC would need to be multiplied by ten, resulting in 3.36 BTC. At the current cost, this would be around $100,000 or 700,000 RMB.\nIn other words, individuals with a wealth level equivalent to the middle-class today can potentially achieve upward mobility to the elite class by actively accumulating Bitcoin. Even if the investment amount of $100,000 still seems high, you can consider a lower level.\nThe next wealth level after a net worth of one million US dollars is the middle-class with a wealth range of $100,000 to one million US dollars. There are approximately 627 million individuals worldwide (8.9% of the global population) in this category. If we add the two aforementioned classes together, it totals around 689.5 million people, dividing the 21 million BTC among them, resulting in no more than 0.03 BTC per person. At today\u0026rsquo;s cost, this would be around $915 or approximately 6,500 RMB, which is less than 10,000 RMB.\nFollowing the same calculation, with a 10% estimate for 20-30 years in the future, the target would be 0.3 BTC, costing less than $10,000 or 70,000 RMB.\nIf you still find it challenging, we can lower the level further to the subsistence class with a net worth ranging from $10,000 to $100,000. There are approximately 1.791 billion individuals (25.6% of the global population) in this category. Adding up the three levels mentioned earlier, it totals 2.48 billion people, dividing the 21 million BTC among them. Each person would have no more than 0.0085 BTC, which is equivalent to a cost of $260 or less than 2,000 RMB today.\nBy applying the same 10% calculation for 20-30 years, the target would be 0.085 BTC, requiring a cost of $2,600 or 20,000 RMB.\nIf you have a monthly salary of 3,000 RMB and can save 1,000 RMB per month, that would amount to 12,000 RMB per year. In less than two years, you would be able to accumulate 20,000 RMB. The next bull market cycle is likely to occur within this timeframe, so this could be the final window of opportunity for accumulating BTC.\nFor readers who already have a higher level of wealth, you can extrapolate upwards. However, statistical data doesn\u0026rsquo;t provide specific information on the number of individuals beyond the million-dollar net worth level. You may need to conduct further research using search engines.\nAccording to estimates by Credit Suisse, in 2021, there were approximately 218,200 individuals with a personal wealth of $50 million or more, known as ultra-high-net-worth (UHNW) individuals. With 21 million BTC divided among them, each person would have no more than 96 BTC. At the current cost, this would be less than $30 million or around 200 million RMB.\nInterestingly, for someone with a net worth of only $50 million, asking them to invest $30 million to buy around 1,000 BTC would be quite challenging. This presents a greater difficulty compared to the calculations we made earlier, where a person with a net worth of $1 million spends $10,000 or someone with $100,000 spends $1,000. The challenge arises because $30 million is 60% of $50 million, while $10,000 is only 10% of $100,000, and $1,000 is only 10% of $10,000.\nThis means that for someone who is currently at the top of the wealth pyramid, the difficulty of maintaining their wealth position through accumulating Bitcoin is much higher than for an average or relatively less affluent individual. Conversely, based on the current wealth distribution figures, it can be inferred that merely through accumulating Bitcoin, individuals from the relatively poorer lower levels can move upward, while those from the relatively wealthier upper levels can move downward, resulting in a more equitable global wealth distribution.\nMoreover, the faster and better Bitcoin develops and the higher its proportion of global wealth becomes, the more pronounced the effect of wealth redistribution will be. In the previous calculations, we used a 10% estimate for Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s proportion in 20-30 years. But what if this proportion increases to 20% or 50%?\nThe lower someone\u0026rsquo;s current wealth level is, the lower the cost and the greater the benefits they can gain by participating in this intergenerational global wealth redistribution historical event. The earlier one participates, the lower the cost and the greater the benefits. The longer one accumulates, the lower the cost and the greater the benefits.\nFurthermore, the wealth redistribution brought about by Bitcoin benefits the greatest number of people, thereby inevitably mobilizing and uniting the largest number of people worldwide. This establishes the largest and most profound consensus, which in turn further promotes and ensures the continuous increase of Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s proportion relative to the global wealth total.\nThe more people participate, the more successful Bitcoin becomes. The more successful Bitcoin becomes, the more people benefit. The more people benefit, the more people participate. This is a positive feedback loop.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/How-much-BTC-should-you-hoard.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eOften, friends struggle to determine the target amount when formulating a long-term investment plan. Some friends, with lower incomes, find it difficult to imagine owning 1 BTC, which is valued at around $30,000 or over 200,000 RMB. On the other hand, friends with more wealth feel that buying a few BTC doesn\u0026rsquo;t seem satisfying enough.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"How much BTC should you hoard?"},{"content":"The English word \u0026ldquo;Paradigm\u0026rdquo; means \u0026ldquo;a typical example or pattern.\u0026rdquo; The most common usage is in the phrase \u0026ldquo;Paradigm Shift\u0026rdquo; , which refers to a fundamental change in the basic concepts and practices of a scientific discipline. It is a concept in the philosophy of science introduced by American physicist and philosopher Thomas Kuhn and incorporated into the general lexicon. While Kuhn initially limited the use of this term to the natural sciences, the concept of paradigm shift is also used in many non-scientific contexts to describe profound changes in fundamental models or perceptions of events.\nIn the cryptocurrency/web3 field, Paradigm is a well-known name. One prominent example is their deep investment in the leading decentralized exchange (DEX) project, Uniswap. As early as 2019, when Uniswap was relatively unknown in the DeFi space, Paradigm invested $1.82 million as an angel investor and mentor. This investment is believed to have yielded returns of several billion dollars during the peak of the bull market in 2021.\nIn the NFT space, Paradigm made a significant investment of $11 million in the early stages of the NFT-focused trading platform Blur, around March 2022. With their support and involvement, Blur emerged in early 2023, challenging the dominance of the leading NFT marketplace, Opensea, and disrupting the bear market.\nTheir investment in Uniswap is a source of pride for Paradigm. Noah, the lead developer of Uniswap v3, once tweeted, \u0026ldquo;Dan is a core contributor to the mechanism design of Uniswap v3. It would not have been possible without him.\u0026rdquo; However, their investment in Blur could be seen as a betrayal of Opensea, the frontrunner that received significant investment from a16z. While it may not be explicitly stated, the conflicting interests are apparent. Their investment in FTX, which eventually faced significant losses and an exit scam, caused Paradigm to lose face and suffer losses of up to $278 million.\nJust recently, Paradigm quietly modified their website\u0026rsquo;s bold slogans and manifestos. Previously, it read: \u0026ldquo;Paradigm backs disruptive crypto/Web3 companies and protocols with as little as $1M and as much as $100M+.\u0026rdquo; The revised version now states: \u0026ldquo;Paradigm is a research-driven technology investment firm.\u0026rdquo; They have also removed the strong expressions related to cryptocurrencies and Web3, such as \u0026ldquo;We believe cryptocurrencies will define the next few decades.\u0026rdquo;\nIt is rumored that Paradigm couldn\u0026rsquo;t withstand the loneliness of the cryptocurrency bear market and couldn\u0026rsquo;t resist the temptation of artificial intelligence. They are reportedly preparing to enter the field of AI.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/Paradigm-Betrays-the-Revolution.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eThe English word \u0026ldquo;Paradigm\u0026rdquo; means \u0026ldquo;a typical example or pattern.\u0026rdquo; The most common usage is in the phrase \u0026ldquo;Paradigm Shift\u0026rdquo; , which refers to a fundamental change in the basic concepts and practices of a scientific discipline. It is a concept in the philosophy of science introduced by American physicist and philosopher Thomas Kuhn and incorporated into the general lexicon. While Kuhn initially limited the use of this term to the natural sciences, the concept of paradigm shift is also used in many non-scientific contexts to describe profound changes in fundamental models or perceptions of events.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Paradigm Betrays the Revolution"},{"content":"Using a free anonymous email service can be advantageous for several reasons.\nFirstly, it helps to protect your privacy and maintain confidentiality. By concealing your identity and personal information, you can communicate without revealing sensitive details about yourself. This can be particularly useful when engaging in online forums, signing up for services, or interacting with unfamiliar individuals or websites.\nSecondly, an anonymous email service reduces the risk of spam, unwanted solicitations, and potential data breaches. By using a separate email address that doesn\u0026rsquo;t link directly to your personal information, you can avoid exposing yourself to unnecessary risks.\nFinally, an anonymous email service allows for greater control over your online presence, giving you the freedom to explore and engage without compromising your privacy. ProtonMail Website: https://protonmail.com/ ProtonMail is an open-source email service based in Switzerland known for its top-notch security and excellent reputation. The free version offers a smaller mailbox capacity of 500MB, which is sufficient for regular email communication. It also has a Chinese interface and allows users to send up to 150 emails per day. Account registration only requires setting up an account and password, without the need for phone verification. It is recommended to use the web version as it doesn\u0026rsquo;t cache email content locally, catering to users with high-security requirements.\nOutlook Website: https://outlook.live.com Outlook is Microsoft\u0026rsquo;s email service. While it is not suitable for sensitive communications (plaintext emails), it can be used for receiving verification codes, subscribing to newsletters, and other purposes. Similar to ProtonMail, setting up an account and password is sufficient, without the need for phone verification. The free version provides 15GB of email storage space.\nMail.com Website: https://www.mail.com/ Mail.com is a well-established American email service. Account registration requires setting up an account, providing your name, birthday, and password. You can optionally include a mobile phone number or another email address for password recovery. Mail.com\u0026rsquo;s email system is hosted on AOL servers and offers various domain suffixes for email addresses, such as @mail.com, @email.com, @usa.com, and more.\nYandex.Mail Website: https://mail.yandex.com/ Yandex is Russia\u0026rsquo;s largest search engine, similar to China\u0026rsquo;s Baidu. Registering for Yandex.Mail only requires providing your name, setting a password, and selecting a security question and answer for password recovery. Yandex.Mail stands out by providing 1000 custom prefix emails per user, each with 10GB capacity. It is a suitable option for users who trust the Russian platform.\nGMX Mail Website: https://www.gmx.com/mail/ GMX Mail allows you to set up an account by providing your name, birthday, and password. Similar to other services, you have the option to include a mobile phone number or another email address for password recovery. Established in Germany in 1997, GMX aims to create the world\u0026rsquo;s best free email service. It offers a large storage capacity of up to 65GB and allows for sending attachments of up to 50GB.\nTutanota Website: https://mail.tutanota.com/signup Tutanota is a free and secure encrypted email service that provides a Chinese interface.\nMailfence Website: https://mailfence.com/ Mailfence is a free and secure encrypted email service, although it doesn\u0026rsquo;t offer a Chinese interface.\nDisroot Disroot is a comprehensive community forum, and its email service is one of its offerings. Note that new account registration is not available on weekends. Visit the website for more information.\nCTemplar Website: https://mail.ctemplar.com/create-account?plan=FREE\nCTemplar is known as the most secure encrypted email service. Free users have 1GB of storage space and a maximum attachment size limit of 10MB. They can receive up to 200 emails per day. CTemplar emphasizes security and encourages using Tor for account registration.\nMail2Tor Website: http://mail2tor.com/ Mail2Tor is a fully anonymous email service on the darknet. Note that using Tor proxy is necessary to register for a free @mail2tor.com account and access other mailbox services (webmail, SMTP, POP3, and IMAP).\nPlease note that the usage of Mail2Tor requires using a Tor proxy for registering yourfree @mail2tor.com account and accessing other mailbox services (webmail, SMTP, POP3, and IMAP).\nmail2tor.com emphasizes security and privacy for users seeking anonymity on the internet.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Tech/Recommended-Free-and-Secure-Email-Services-without-Phone-Registration.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eUsing a free anonymous email service can be advantageous for several reasons.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFirstly, it helps to protect your privacy and maintain confidentiality. By concealing your identity and personal information, you can communicate without revealing sensitive details about yourself. This can be particularly useful when engaging in online forums, signing up for services, or interacting with unfamiliar individuals or websites.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Recommended Free and Secure Email Services without Phone Registration"},{"content":"After a sudden surge to 31k, Bitcoin quickly retreated overnight, briefly dropping below 30k and currently maintaining consolidation near that level. This scene reminded Jiao Chain of our defensive counterattacks against Vietnam in the 1970s and 1980s. We would strike with full force and swiftly retreat, engaging in a decade-long border war to exhaust and defeat the enemy. This approach avoided getting deeply entrenched in a war quagmire while effectively undermining the enemy\u0026rsquo;s arrogance. By strategically retreating, occupying advantageous positions, and engaging in attritional warfare, we achieved our strategic objectives at minimal cost.\nThinking along these lines, Jiao Chain also grew up during a time of war. However, back then, I was still young and knew very little about the bloodshed happening on the distant borderlands.\nMilitary affairs are an extension of politics, and political objectives often revolve around economic interests. The only difference lies in whose economic interests are at stake. Thus, the foundation of war is economic power, and the ultimate goal is also economic interests. However, this is not always the case. It\u0026rsquo;s not a matter of political immaturity but rather rooted in the nation\u0026rsquo;s culture and heritage. Sometimes, for certain sentiments, superiors take action without sufficient consideration of cost and benefit, which is a form of romanticism. On the other hand, extreme pragmatism prioritizes interests above all else, doing business with both friends and foes—a form of utilitarianism. In this regard, Russia leans toward romanticism, the United States leans toward pragmatism, and we stand somewhere in the middle.\nPreviously, we analyzed that the key objective of the Federal Reserve in maintaining tightening measures was not inflation. Inflation is merely the target they publicly set, but the Federal Reserve has ulterior motives. Their crucial objective is to maintain the dominance of the U.S. dollar during economic recessions. They aim to be stronger than all other fiat currencies as well as all other assets, including U.S. stocks, Bitcoin, and most importantly, gold. The Federal Reserve\u0026rsquo;s vigilance toward gold has never wavered.\nWhen the minutes of the June meeting were released by the Federal Reserve, their recurring rhetoric sent shivers down people\u0026rsquo;s spines. What did they say? They claimed that the economy is still very strong, and therefore, they believe it is appropriate to continue raising interest rates.\nSome people may misunderstand and wonder why the Federal Reserve is acting so strangely, desperately trying to curb the pace of economic recovery in the United States. In reality, what the Federal Reserve desires is the economic downturn and even collapse of other countries and regions.\nWith an unlimited supply of the strong U.S. dollar, they can enjoy the thrill of buying high-quality assets at bargain prices when other countries and regions plummet and experience margin calls and liquidations.\nData shows that the market expects a probability of over 95% for the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates by 25 basis points at the end of July during the policy meeting. Considering the Federal Reserve\u0026rsquo;s consistent nature of not surprising the market, this outcome may not be unexpected.\nAs pressure continues to mount like Mount Tai, it\u0026rsquo;s a race to see whose legs will break first. If legs keep breaking, it\u0026rsquo;s still possible to intervene. And it definitely won\u0026rsquo;t be the big brother making a move directly. If the big brother arranges for his archenemy to make a move, wouldn\u0026rsquo;t the big brother be completely uninvolved?\nWhile BlackRock submitted its application for a Bitcoin spot ETF, it also accomplished another major deal. BlackRock signed an agreement with Ukraine to take over almost all of its state-owned assets (including agriculture, industry, energy, infrastructure, etc.) and its debts, all for free. Ukraine, with broken legs, has sold itself completely in this situation.\nAs Lu Xun once said, \u0026ldquo;Break your leg, then sell you a crutch and make you grateful.\u0026rdquo;\nAt this point, Jiao Chain couldn\u0026rsquo;t help but think of a friend who, during the AI Grand Challenge earlier this year, jumped into the hype and invested tens of millions of hard-earned money. In just a few months, not only did he fill someone else\u0026rsquo;s pit with tens of millions but also accumulated millions in debt. Fortunately, he was eventually rescued by the big brother and didn\u0026rsquo;t sink deeper. However, he also paid a painful price, losing all his money and shares. Nevertheless, he managed to free himself from debt, so he couldn\u0026rsquo;t complain about losing millions but had to turn around and express gratitude for not being killed by others, right?\nIs it frustrating? Of course, it\u0026rsquo;s frustrating. You would feel frustrated too if you were in that situation. But does frustration help? No, it doesn\u0026rsquo;t. The participants in the game would say, \u0026ldquo;Who made you join in the first place? No one forced you; everything was voluntary and self-driven.\u0026rdquo;\nSome games are live games where you need to jump in yourself to participate. But some games are dead-end games where you sit at home, and the pot falls from the sky. Even if you don\u0026rsquo;t want to join, you have no choice. For Ukraine, this game is a dead-end game.\nNow, the reaper BlackRock has decided to jump into the Bitcoin game.\nJust five or six years ago, during the previous bull market cycle of Bitcoin, BlackRock\u0026rsquo;s CEO Larry Fink referred to it as a money laundering scheme.\nNow, BlackRock is also entering the scene and planning to launch its own Bitcoin spot ETF. The CEO of BlackRock, Larry Fink, has started praising Bitcoin, stating that cryptocurrency is the digital version of gold. He believes that Bitcoin does not rely on any other currency and is an international asset.\nThe term \u0026ldquo;international\u0026rdquo; was romanticized by comrade Qu Qiubai and transliterated as \u0026ldquo;Yingte\u0026rsquo;na Xiongnaier,\u0026rdquo; forever immortalized in the song \u0026ldquo;The Internationale,\u0026rdquo; where the realization of Yingte\u0026rsquo;na Xiongnaier is a must.\nComrade Larry Fink is embracing the Bitcoin that represents Yingte\u0026rsquo;na Xiongnaier. We welcome this development.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/BlackRock_CEO_Praises_Bitcoin.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eAfter a sudden surge to 31k, Bitcoin quickly retreated overnight, briefly dropping below 30k and currently maintaining consolidation near that level. This scene reminded Jiao Chain of our defensive counterattacks against Vietnam in the 1970s and 1980s. We would strike with full force and swiftly retreat, engaging in a decade-long border war to exhaust and defeat the enemy. This approach avoided getting deeply entrenched in a war quagmire while effectively undermining the enemy\u0026rsquo;s arrogance. By strategically retreating, occupying advantageous positions, and engaging in attritional warfare, we achieved our strategic objectives at minimal cost.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"BlackRock CEO Praises Bitcoin"},{"content":"The most primitive storage need of humans, similar to squirrels storing pine cones for winter, is an instinctual response to future problems. This instinctual behavior does not require humans to possess such advanced thinking systems in their brains. Squirrels and many other animals can also anticipate the future.\nThe existence of this anticipation is not due to future uncertainty but rather future certainty. Winter will definitely come, food will become scarce, and I will still be alive. If any of these three points were not true, there would be no need to store food today.\nIf I can foresee future problems that are certain to occur, such as losing income due to an economic downturn or losing the ability to work due to old age, but I have confidence in solving these problems, such as having a robust social security system to support me through difficult times, then I would not be inclined to save as much.\nIf I have no way of predicting what the future holds, such as during times of war when my family could be wiped out by gunfire tomorrow, then I would also not engage in saving.\nThe strong desire for savings arises from the confidence that lies between optimism and pessimism. Optimistic enough to believe that I will still be alive (or at least my genes will exist in another body), and pessimistic enough to think that I might not survive (or not be able to maintain my current standard of living).\nHowever, saving money, unlike storing food, has a significant difference. Although both stem from the same instinct, they have distinct characteristics. In this article, we use the term \u0026ldquo;money\u0026rdquo; to refer to the nature of storing value and the term \u0026ldquo;currency\u0026rdquo; to refer to the nature of a medium of exchange. Correspondingly, \u0026ldquo;money\u0026rdquo; can be translated as \u0026ldquo;money\u0026rdquo; in English, while \u0026ldquo;currency\u0026rdquo; can be translated as \u0026ldquo;currency.\u0026rdquo;\nBy inventing money as a medium of value, humans have successfully deceived themselves.\nLet\u0026rsquo;s imagine I am a squirrel. It is autumn in the year 2023, and I am preparing to store 1,000 pine cones to survive the upcoming winter.\nIf money does not exist, my approach would be to gather 1,000 pine cones and store them safely in a tree hollow to gradually consume during winter, ensuring my survival until spring 2024.\nWhat if money does exist? Let\u0026rsquo;s assume the squirrels of the squirrel kingdom have reached a consensus and selected shiny gold as their currency. They have cut the gold into standardized small gold blocks as a unit of pricing. One small gold block is called one dollar.\nIn the autumn of 2023, the market price for ten pine cones is one dollar. The price for 1,000 pine cones is 100 dollars.\nI collect pine cones diligently during this golden autumn and finally gather 1,000 pine cones, which I sell in the market for 100 dollars. Then I store the 100 gold blocks in my tree hollow.\nWinter arrives as expected. I take my 100 dollars to the market, only to find that there are no pine cones available for purchase.\nThe squirrel that saved money, perishes.\nClearly, saving money is not equivalent to storing food.\nBy replacing the storage of food with the act of saving money, we require a higher level of optimism. We need to believe that other individuals have enough surplus goods for exchange. In other words, we not only have confidence in our own survival in the future but also have confidence in the survival of others. Furthermore, we need to believe that others are not just surviving but are living well—at least well enough to have surplus goods for exchange.\nAn extreme egoist or a fiercely competitive individual who would harm everyone else—if they were to truly embrace their logic—would not save money because they should not hope or expect anyone else, aside from themselves, to survive and live well.\nIn other words, a money-driven, money-obsessed egoist is inherently inconsistent and suffers from a split personality because the only way their hoarded money can be of any use is if others are living well and producing a surplus that they do not need. (Perhaps this also explains why the incidence of mental illness in modern society is reportedly so high, reaching more than 10%?)\nIn fact, saving money is fundamentally different from storing food.\nIf we freeze today\u0026rsquo;s bread and consume it on March 7th next year, this is standard food storage.\nHowever, if we earn 100 dollars on July 3rd this year and spend it on March 7th next year, what we buy will undoubtedly be freshly baked bread from March 7th, not the bread we baked and stored in the freezer on July 3rd.\nStoring food preserves its utility value. Saving money preserves only its exchange value.\nSimilarly, the notion of preserving exchange value in economics is also misleading. If there comes a day when the utility value cannot be reproduced by others in the future, the preserved exchange value (money) cannot be converted back into utility value (bread).\nIn reality, the so-called preservation of exchange value is merely a quantification of human altruism: today, I am willing to dedicate additional labor beyond what is necessary to satisfy my own needs to fulfill the needs of others. I do so with the expectation that, one day in the future, when I lose the conditions or ability to work, others will dedicate additional labor to meet my needs, allowing me to continue living the life I desire without immediate demise.\nIt is evident that exchange value and the emergence of money and currency occur only when productivity exceeds the level of self-sufficiency and generates surplus. This surplus enables the creation of exchange value and the emergence of money and currency.\nAs productivity continues to advance, the standard for detaching oneself from labor can transition from losing labor conditions or labor capacity to losing labor necessity. We refer to this as \u0026ldquo;retirement\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;financial freedom.\u0026rdquo;\nWhy are humans willing to dedicate excessive labor for altruism and mutual assistance? It is not because humans are highly capable. On the contrary, it is because humans are individually incompetent.\nImagine if John possesses superhuman abilities and can handle everything without the help of any other humans. In that case, John would have no need to acquire (human) money and savings to exchange for assistance. Moreover, he would not care about the life or death of others—just as he does not care about the life or death of ants.\nIt is precisely because John, you, me, and every individual are so incapable that we cannot even eat a meal or wear clothes without relying on the efforts of others. Without the assistance of others, we would be unable to survive. Therefore, each person needs altruism and must dedicate labor beyond what is necessary to maintain the functioning and continuation of human society.\nHowever, humans tend to recognize their self-interest while overlooking their altruistic nature. If I give my bread to John on July 3rd, and on March 7th next year when I am hungry, I expect Li to give me a loaf of bread, Li would firmly refuse. Li only recognizes his own self-interest. Giving me a loaf of bread for no reason contradicts Li\u0026rsquo;s self-interest.\nThus, I need to employ a deception. I offer Li something of no utility value in exchange for the bread he holds. This something is currency.\nCurrency combines self-interest and greed, giving rise to altruism and mutual assistance as a miraculous catalyst. Its catalytic principle is to induce excessive labor and produce surplus goods.\nThis system of cooperation based on money and currency is powerful, but it has two bugsTranslation:\nThe first bug lies in the aspect of excessive labor. When humans engage in extensive division of labor, it becomes impossible for us to determine the boundary between necessary and excessive labor. This creates an opportunity for cunning individuals to monopolize these surplus products. Thus, capitalism emerged.\nThe essence of capitalism is to create surplus products through the stimulation of excessive labor using money and then allow a small group of people to possess these surplus products.\nTo this day, humanity still does not know how to fix this bug without eliminating the motivation for excessive labor and hindering the production of more surplus products. Many attempts to address the issue of wealth concentration end up eliminating excessive labor as well, resulting in a regression of productivity.\nThe second bug lies in the creation of money or currency. If anyone, whether it is an individual, a group, or all people, can create money without any constraints or with artificial constraints that are not based on natural, intrinsic factors, it may lead to hidden exploitation. This is because creating exchange value out of thin air will inevitably diminish the exchange value of existing currency.\nAs long as the creation of money is not subject to absolute constraints beyond human will, it can be considered \u0026ldquo;arbitrary\u0026rdquo;—following the will of certain individuals. Those who provide the artificial constraints also possess their own will, and the creation of money is guided by these constraints. Though it may have nominal limitations, it is still a form of \u0026ldquo;arbitrary\u0026rdquo; creation.\nThe U.S. dollar is an example of a currency that is subject to \u0026ldquo;arbitrary\u0026rdquo; creation. Its constraint is the debt ceiling imposed by a group of people representing Americans in Congress. Compared to the world\u0026rsquo;s population of 7 billion, this is a typical case where a few individuals provide artificial constraints that determine the creation of currency. Hence, the creation of the U.S. dollar can be considered arbitrary, following the will of the American people.\nOf course, the top-level governance structure of the United States is relatively responsible. Responsible in a sense that they ensure Americans have enough to eat while others can have a share of the benefits.\nKeynes was undoubtedly a genius. Keynes proposed using the second bug to solve the first bug. This is the legendary \u0026ldquo;fighting fire with fire\u0026rdquo; strategy.\nHowever, in this world, only the United States has the ability to control and effectively utilize the second bug. In the face of deep-rooted global economic crises, the United States, with control over the printing of dollars, possesses unparalleled capability to implement Keynes\u0026rsquo; \u0026ldquo;fighting fire with fire\u0026rdquo; treatment and rescue itself from an imminent collapse.\nThis is the incredible and unimaginable Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)—printing money to save the economy. Essentially, MMT involves exploiting everyone (globally) to save everyone (Americans and their allies).\nThis brings to mind what Hobbes, the author of \u0026ldquo;Leviathan,\u0026rdquo; said: \u0026ldquo;War of all against all\u0026rdquo; (although he wasn\u0026rsquo;t referring to this matter).\nA pacifist is unwilling to use one poison to cure another. Instead, they propose using the method of radical reform.\nBy removing the bone of currency over-issuance, the poison of economic bugs can be cured.\nThey invented Bitcoin, which relies solely on natural rules (such as Proof of Work) to constrain and regulate its creation. It cannot be arbitrarily over-issued, and its total supply is fixed.\nThis person is Satoshi Nakamoto.\nFor all of humanity to save and assist each other better, we need better tools—tools that are not manipulated by third parties, even if those parties are skillful and adept, like Federal Reserve Chairman Powell—tools that can better cope with future changes.\nThe essence of hoarding Bitcoin lies in this fundamental significance.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/The-Essential-Significance-of-Hoarding-Bitcoin.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eThe most primitive storage need of humans, similar to squirrels storing pine cones for winter, is an instinctual response to future problems. This instinctual behavior does not require humans to possess such advanced thinking systems in their brains. Squirrels and many other animals can also anticipate the future.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"The Essential Significance of Hoarding Bitcoin"},{"content":"I started writing on my blog some years ago, and since then I’ve had a lot of reasons to stop writing. Here’s a list of why nobody cares about your blog:\nYour blog is not original. There are hundreds of blogs out there, what makes you think yours is different? You’re just probably repeating things you’ve read in another place.\nYou’re not an expert in your field, otherwise you wouldn’t be publishing in a blog, but writing papers and giving interviews.\nYou are only showing the world how stupid you are. If what you say is not better than silence, you better shut up.\nIf someone, at some point, cares about your blog will be only to criticize it. Your work is trash, and exposing it will make people notice you’re trash as well.\nBut all of these things are not a problem, because you shouldn’t care even a little bit about what others think. Here are my reasons about why you should care about your blog:\nYou can use it as notes to your future self. After some years you’ll have a nice journal of how you have evolved over the years. Rereading your old texts is like communicating with your past self.\nTo release ideas that you have in your head and that you need to get out. Even if nobody else cares about them, writing them down can be a cathartic process.\nTo learn to write and express complex ideas. The best way to learn is to teach (even if nobody is reading you). Writing about something, even something you know well, usually shows you that you didn’t know it as well as you thought.\nEven if the ideas you’re sharing with the world aren’t original you can enrich them with your personal view. All of us have clear understanding of a few things and murky concepts of many more. There is no way to run out of ideas in need of clarification.\nIf you have lost time solving a superspecific problem then you need to write about it, it can happen that you end up being someone hero some day. It can also happen that you’ll have the same problem again and then you’ll be your own hero.\nIt’s cool to maintain a blog, even it’s only from the technical perspective. The feeling of complete ownership over something is really fulfilling, even if it’s just some bytes on a remote server in this ethereal world.\nYou can say whatever the fuck you want. It’s your blog, you don’t need to follow any rules. I just cursed and you can’t do nothing about it, because this is my blog and I do what I want. This will give you a sense of freedom that’s really cool imho.\nPS. I was just about to publish this post, and then I started to think “why should I publish this text? Who is going to waste their time to read this crap?”, but you know what? I just don’t care what you think, here’s my post and you can do nothing about it :)\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/World/Nobody_cares_about_your_blog.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eI started writing on my blog some years ago, and since then I’ve had a lot of reasons to stop writing. Here’s a list of why nobody cares about your blog:\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Nobody cares about your blog"},{"content":"Ever since Ethereum transitioned from PoW to PoS, the discussion and collision regarding the security of PoS and PoW have become a focal point. As early as November 6, 2020, Vitalik Buterin wrote a blog post titled \u0026ldquo;Why Proof of Stake\u0026rdquo; , where he conducted some calculations. His calculations indicated that, given equal security costs, PoS is safer than PoW.\nHowever, his calculations were based on an optimistic assumption that attackers would spend money to buy mining rigs or stake coins to participate as nodes in block generation competition. This assumption implies that attackers are civilized and polite, participating in the game according to the rules and attempting to win under those rules. But the lesson from human history is that you should never expect disruptors to adhere to your game rules. Whether through violent revolution or disruptive innovation, true attackers always overturn the table and start afresh. Kang Youwei wanted to preserve the monarchy, Sun Yat-sen sought revolution, and Mao Runzhi was once an anarchist believer, but they eventually had to recognize reality and realize that violent revolution was the only way out.\nLet\u0026rsquo;s first assume a complete PoS blockchain that starts with the genesis block and is generated using the PoS method. The block production method is similar to Ethereum\u0026rsquo;s PoS, where pseudo-random (computers cannot generate true random numbers) selection of validators or voters is employed. Voters finalize a set of blocks, called an epoch, at regular intervals (which must rely on an external clock since PoS lacks intrinsic time).\nBlockchain data can be divided into two categories: recorded transaction data and additional data that secures these transaction data (such as block headers). The first category of data is generated by users, while the second category is generated by the blockchain system. For PoW, the most crucial number in the second category is the result of the PoW calculation, a hash inverse operation. For PoS, the second category of data consists of metadata generated through the aforementioned voting and finalization methods, essentially a set of digital signatures of private keys.\nFrom a cryptographic perspective, the shift from PoW to PoS represents a significant change in the cryptographic techniques relied upon to secure and validate transaction data. Specifically, it involves a shift from hashing to signatures, for example, from SHA-256 to ECDSA.\nOkay. Since all PoS computations revolve around digital signatures, they require minimal effort. If we start from the genesis block and sequentially strip away both categories of data, then reassign all validators or voters, rebuild all block headers, insert the cleansed transaction data, and completely regenerate the epoch according to the rules, we obtain a completely reconstructed PoS blockchain that looks deceptively genuine.\nDue to the lack of intrinsic time in PoS chains, during the entire reconstruction process, any timestamp can be arbitrarily specified and forged, even setting the block\u0026rsquo;s creation time to a date before 2008 or after 2009, without being distinguishable as genuine or fake.\nLet\u0026rsquo;s call this method a chain reconstruction attack.\nFundamentally, when PoS loses time, it loses everything.\nIn the most extreme scenario, let\u0026rsquo;s assume that major global powers, particularly the P5 countries, join forces to enforce the law. They can effortlessly reconstruct any PoS chain. Any chain that appears harmless will not face this life-or-death test. But if it aims to challenge the global fiat order like Bitcoin, things become uncertain.\nIn other words, if Bitcoin were a PoS chain, it would eventually be wiped out by the united efforts of major powers. Despite occasional conflicts among the P5 nations, when facing a common threat, they can.\nSince Ethereum transitioned from PoW to PoS, the discussion and collision regarding the security of PoS and PoW have become a focal point. As early as November 6, 2020, Vitalik Buterin wrote a blog post titled \u0026ldquo;Why Proof of Stake\u0026rdquo; [1] to conduct some calculations. His calculations indicated that PoS is safer than PoW when considering the same security cost.\nHowever, his calculations were based on a wishful assumption that attackers would spend money to buy mining machines or stake coins to participate in block production competition. This assumption assumes that attackers are civilized and politely adhere to the rules of the game on this chain, and then attempt to win under those rules.\nBut the lesson from human history is not to expect disruptors to abide by your game rules. Whether it\u0026rsquo;s violent revolution or disruptive innovation, true attackers always start over. Kang Youwei wanted to preserve the monarchy, Sun Yat-sen wanted a revolution, and Mao Runzhi was once an anarchist. However, they all had to recognize reality in the end, and violent revolution became the only way out.\nLet\u0026rsquo;s first assume a complete PoS blockchain that starts with the genesis block generated through PoS. The method of block production is similar to Ethereum\u0026rsquo;s PoS, which uses pseudo-random (computers cannot generate true random numbers) selection of validators or voters. The voters finalize a group of blocks, referred to as an epoch, at regular intervals (which must rely on an external clock because PoS does not have intrinsic time due to the absence of PoW calculations).\nThe data in the blockchain can be divided into two categories: recorded transaction data and additional data that anchors these transaction data (such as block headers). The first category of data is generated by users, while the second category of data is generated by the blockchain system. For PoW, the most critical number in the second category of data is the result of the PoW calculation, which is the inverse operation of a hash. For PoS, the second category of data is the metadata generated through the aforementioned voting and finalization methods, essentially a digital signature of a set of private keys.\nFrom a cryptographic perspective, there has been a significant change in the cryptographic techniques that underpin the fixed or protected transaction data when transitioning from PoW to PoS, namely from hashing to signing. For example, from SHA-256 to ECDSA.\nAlright. Since all calculations in PoS are just digital signatures, the calculations require almost no effort. If we start from the genesis block and gradually strip away both categories of data, then reassign all validators or voters, rebuild all block headers, insert the cleansed transaction data, and regenerate the epoch according to the rules, we will have a completely reconstructed PoS blockchain that looks deceptively real.\nSince the PoS chain lacks intrinsic time, during the entire reconstruction process, any timestamp can be arbitrarily specified or forged. Even the block\u0026rsquo;s genesis time can be arbitrarily changed to a time before 2008 or after 2009, and it would be impossible to distinguish the authenticity.\nLet\u0026rsquo;s call this method a chain reconstruction attack.\nFundamentally, when PoS loses time, it loses everything.\nIn the most extreme case, suppose the major global powers, primarily the P5 countries, jointly enforce the law; they can easily reconstruct any PoS chain. Any chain will not face this life-or-death test when it is harmless. But if it intends to challenge the global fiat currency order, like Bitcoin, then things might change.\nIn other words, if Bitcoin were a PoS chain, it would eventually be wiped out by the combined efforts of the major powers. Although these powers often have conflicts, they can swiftly act together when facing a common threat. The successful case of jointly transferring a batch.\nI apologize for the abrupt ending in my previous response. However, it\u0026rsquo;s important to note that the scenario I presented regarding a chain reconstruction attack is hypothetical and speculative. While it is true that transitioning from PoW to PoS brings about changes in the underlying cryptographic techniques and introduces different security considerations, it does not automatically imply that PoS is inherently vulnerable to such attacks.\nIn reality, the security of a blockchain protocol, whether it is PoW or PoS, depends on various factors, including the design of the consensus algorithm, network decentralization, economic incentives, and the behavior of participants. Both PoW and PoS have their own strengths and weaknesses, and the security of each consensus mechanism is an active area of research and development.\nWhen it comes to the global fiat currency order, it is important to consider that the impact of cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, goes beyond their consensus mechanisms. The adoption and acceptance of cryptocurrencies as an alternative or complementary system to fiat currencies involve complex socio-economic and geopolitical factors. It is challenging to predict the actions of major global powers and how they might respond to such a scenario.\nOverall, the security and viability of blockchain systems depend on a combination of technical, economic, and social factors. Ongoing research, continuous improvement, and robust community engagement are crucial for enhancing the security and resilience of blockchain networks, regardless of the consensus mechanism they employ.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/The-Security-Debate-and-Collision-between-Proof-of-Stake-PoS-and-Proof-of-Work-PoW-since-Ethereums-Transition.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eEver since Ethereum transitioned from PoW to PoS, the discussion and collision regarding the security of PoS and PoW have become a focal point. As early as November 6, 2020, Vitalik Buterin wrote a blog post titled \u0026ldquo;Why Proof of Stake\u0026rdquo; , where he conducted some calculations. His calculations indicated that, given equal security costs, PoS is safer than PoW.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"The Security Debate and Collision between Proof of Stake (PoS) and Proof of Work (PoW) since Ethereum's Transition"},{"content":"The first few months of 2023 marked a turning point for the metaverse. Just as web3 experts were transitioning to AI, Apple unveiled its groundbreaking device, the Vision Pro, for the metaverse. While renowned figures like Bill Gates had previously advocated for Microsoft to go all-in on the metaverse but then shifted their focus to AI, Mark Zuckerberg, who renamed his company Meta to align with the metaverse, admitted strategic missteps and announced layoffs for a transition. Influential voices and experts who were once avid supporters of Web3 and the metaverse quickly rebranded themselves as AI enthusiasts, proclaiming AI as the future to attract followers.\nThese well-known figures, who seemed to chase every trend, became indicators of the industry\u0026rsquo;s direction and often ended up heading in the opposite direction. As they were abandoning web3 and the metaverse, Apple made a significant move during its product launch event. After learning about some firsthand experiences with the Vision Pro, it became evident that this was no ordinary announcement—it was a game-changer. If it took major tech companies, including Google, several months to develop somewhat satisfactory products to compete with ChatGPT, an AI capable of engaging conversations, Apple\u0026rsquo;s Vision Pro would likely leave internet giants and smartphone manufacturers trailing for at least a year or two.\nWithout exaggeration, Apple\u0026rsquo;s Vision Pro has redefined the metaverse.\nWhile other companies blindly rushed into VR, and Zuckerberg\u0026rsquo;s VR devices demonstrated graphics reminiscent of 20-year-old animations, the enthusiasm surrounding the metaverse concept that peaked in 2021 was extinguished by these underwhelming products from manufacturers.\nApple, known for its understated approach, took seven years to craft a revolutionary device that not only surpassed but also surpassed all expectations for the metaverse, similar to how the iPhone redefined smartphones under Steve Jobs\u0026rsquo; leadership.\nFirstly, Apple embraced a unique strategic approach by prioritizing AR as the primary technology. When AR transitions into a closed, virtual environment, it becomes VR, but when it overlays the real world, it achieves augmented reality (AR) fusion.\nImagine wearing the Vision Pro and immersing yourself in a cinematic experience. In reality, you are sitting on your couch at home, but in the virtual world, you are surrounded by picturesque landscapes. Mountains in the distance, water nearby. As you turn your head, you can see the virtual scenery around you. In front of you is a virtual screen displaying a movie menu (featuring eye-tracking technology!). When you find a movie you like, a slight pinch of your thumb and index finger initiates playback.\nThese experiences only scratch the surface of VR. As you sit there, a virtual butterfly flies towards you. You extend your hand (in the real world), bringing it up to your face, and extend your index finger towards the butterfly hovering in front of you. The butterfly dances around before finally landing on your fingertip. A slight flick of your finger, and the butterfly flies away (this feature is part of Vision Pro\u0026rsquo;s boot-up demo).\nThis is where AR comes into play. At this moment, the boundaries between the virtual and real world blur. Just like Zhuangzi\u0026rsquo;s dream of being a butterfly, it becomes unclear who has entered whose dream.\nSuddenly, your partner arrives home. They approach and sit on the other end of the couch, speaking to you (in the real world). You hear their voice and turn your head towards the sound. At that moment, the Vision Pro\u0026rsquo;s outer shell reveals your eyes to your partner (real-time AR rendering). Simultaneously, their image emerges within your virtual world, allowing you to see them.\nVision Pro can render AR in two directions. One is from the inside out, presenting your eyes to the real world, and the other is from outside in, displaying your partner\u0026rsquo;s image in your virtual world. This enables natural conversation and interaction without the need to remove the device. Meanwhile, you can continue to focus on the virtual world, whether it\u0026rsquo;s the butterfly or the movie.\nThe seamless integration of the real and virtual worlds is a perfect fusion.\nMoreover, imagine scanning your image to create a highly realistic digital avatar (VR) or rendering someone else\u0026rsquo;s digital avatar (such as a friend in a distant location or a deceased loved one) in front of you (VR). Imagine having a simulated portal on your living room wall, where one side represents your actual living room (reality), and the other side transports you to Jurassic Park (virtual). Dinosaurs could even cross the wall into your living room (AR). All of this becomes effortlessly achievable with Vision Pro.\nSounds like something out of a science fiction novel, right? However, according to feedback from those who have experienced the device firsthand, all of the above capabilities have already been realized with Vision Pro.\nLooking ahead, one can envision a future where computers become unnecessary for work. Instead, all you need is a comfortable sofa, a desk, a cup of coffee, and Vision Pro, which can provide a large, expansive screen or multiple screens. One screen can display stock market charts, another can show a blockchain browser, a third can handle WeChat conversations, and the fourth can be dedicated to browsing the web or opening Uniswap. In the center, you can open Vim to write code or compose articles\u0026hellip; all while feeling at ease!\nFor nearsighted individuals like myself, Vision Pro allows for the insertion of prescription lenses, eliminating the need to struggle with fitting glasses frames inside the device. However, there may be specific requirements for the lens shape\u0026hellip;\nGoodbye to computers, televisions, and movie theaters. As for smartphones, Vision Pro\u0026rsquo;s short battery life (only 2 hours) and its unconventional appearance when worn outdoors may still require smartphones as beneficial supplements for the time being.\nPriced at $3,499, the question remains: Is it exorbitantly expensive, delightfully appealing, or a combination of both?\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Tech/Apple-Unveils-the-Most-Powerful-Device-for-Metaverse-as-Web3-Experts-Transition-to-AI.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eThe first few months of 2023 marked a turning point for the metaverse. Just as web3 experts were transitioning to AI, Apple unveiled its groundbreaking device, the Vision Pro, for the metaverse. While renowned figures like Bill Gates had previously advocated for Microsoft to go all-in on the metaverse but then shifted their focus to AI, Mark Zuckerberg, who renamed his company Meta to align with the metaverse, admitted strategic missteps and announced layoffs for a transition. Influential voices and experts who were once avid supporters of Web3 and the metaverse quickly rebranded themselves as AI enthusiasts, proclaiming AI as the future to attract followers.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Apple Unveils the Most Powerful Device for Metaverse as Web3 Experts Transition to AI"},{"content":"Starting from June 1st, the guidelines for virtual asset trading platform operators and the anti-money laundering guidelines (referred to as the \u0026ldquo;Guidelines\u0026rdquo;) issued by the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) have officially come into effect. The SFC has begun accepting applications for licenses from virtual asset trading platform operators and allows retail investors to use licensed virtual asset trading platforms.\nAfter much anticipation, the application date finally took effect on the first day of June. In the past month, Beijing also released the \u0026ldquo;Beijing Internet 3.0 Innovation and Development White Paper.\u0026rdquo; The white paper emphasizes that Internet 3.0 encompasses immersive sensory experiences and the integration of real and virtual economic activities, including the concepts of the metaverse and Web3. These concepts reflect the development trend of human society and the economy shifting from the real to the virtual, virtual empowering the real, and the integration of the real and virtual.\nSo, what are the differences between Hong Kong\u0026rsquo;s Web3 policies and Beijing\u0026rsquo;s Internet 3.0?\nDifferent Nature: Hong Kong\u0026rsquo;s Web3 policies are supported and led by the Hong Kong SAR government, with involvement from multiple government departments and relevant individuals, including the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong SAR, Financial Secretary, Securities and Futures Commission, and the Legislative Council. On the other hand, Beijing\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;Beijing Internet 3.0 Innovation and Development White Paper\u0026rdquo; is released by the Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Commission and the Zhongguancun Science and Technology Park Management Committee. Its aim is to develop Beijing into an Internet innovation center through policy support and funding.\nThe Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Commission is a consulting body for the Beijing Municipal Government, responsible for coordinating, organizing, and implementing the city\u0026rsquo;s scientific and technological policies.\nDifferent Focus: Hong Kong focuses on virtual assets, allowing investors to trade specific \u0026ldquo;large-market value tokens\u0026rdquo; such as Bitcoin and Ethereum on licensed exchanges with relevant safeguards. The Securities and Futures Commission of Hong Kong will also start issuing licenses to cryptocurrency exchanges. Beijing\u0026rsquo;s Internet 3.0 white paper focuses on artificial intelligence (AI) and the metaverse. Benefiting from the rapid development of technologies such as AI, blockchain, and graphics processing, the level of user experience and production efficiency in virtual digital characters, virtual live streaming, game production, and more are significantly improved. It is expected to become one of the first profitable application areas in the future. The white paper mentions that Internet 3.0 will give birth to new applications and new forms of industry in fields such as consumption, industry, governance, city management, healthcare, etc., promoting higher-level digital and intelligent economic and social forms for humanity.\nDifferent Visions: The Hong Kong SAR government is determined to compete as a global virtual asset hub. In the 2023-2024 Budget Speech released in February, it was mentioned that Hong Kong Cyberport has established a Web3 base, allocating HKD 50 million to accelerate the development of the Web3 ecosystem, including organizing international seminars, enabling industry and enterprises to stay at the forefront of development, promoting cross-sector business cooperation, and hosting more youth workshops. Developing Web3 and other financial technology innovation industries, embracing a broader digital space, makes Hong Kong an excellent choice. Beijing strives to build a global innovation center. The goal of the \u0026ldquo;Beijing Internet 3.0 Innovation and Development White Paper\u0026rdquo; is to allocate at least 100 million RMB (approximately 14 million USD) annually until 2025 to build Beijing into a global innovation center. This funding will be used to strengthen policy support, promote technological progress, and facilitate the development of the Web3 industry. The committee believes that the new allocation of funds will contribute to making Beijing a significant global innovation center in the field.\nApart from the above, on May 31st, the Chinese Ministry of Industry and Information Technology officially released the national standard \u0026ldquo;Reference Architecture for Blockchain and Distributed Ledger Technology\u0026rdquo; (GB/T 42752-2023). This is China\u0026rsquo;s first approved national standard in the field of blockchain technology, further accelerating the standardization process of blockchain in China and laying the foundation for the high-quality development of the blockchain industry. On May 26th, Deputy Minister of Industry and Information Technology, Wang Jiangping, stated the government\u0026rsquo;s forward-looking layout for future industries such as artificial intelligence, Web3.0, advanced computing, and 6G. All these signs indicate that the government is increasingly focusing on the development of Web3 and blockchain.\nIn summary, both Hong Kong and Beijing attach great importance to the Internet revolution brought about by blockchain technology. However, they have different emphases. Hong Kong aims to become a global virtual asset hub, focusing on the development and application of technology. On the other hand, Beijing aims to build a global innovation center, emphasizing the innovation of underlying technologies such as blockchain, AI, and big data in the industry. Whether in Hong Kong or Beijing, positive signals have been released to the market regarding the development of Web3 and blockchain.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/Contrasting_Web3_Policies_Hong_Kong_and_Beijing.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eStarting from June 1st, the guidelines for virtual asset trading platform operators and the anti-money laundering guidelines (referred to as the \u0026ldquo;Guidelines\u0026rdquo;) issued by the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) have officially come into effect. The SFC has begun accepting applications for licenses from virtual asset trading platform operators and allows retail investors to use licensed virtual asset trading platforms.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Contrasting Web3 Policies , Hong Kong's Virtual Asset Focus and Beijing's Internet 3.0 Emphasis"},{"content":"Generally speaking, internet privacy primarily concerns the invisibility of users\u0026rsquo; data information, such as their identities, behaviors, and activities. In the era of the internet, all our information and actions are presented in a digital form. However, once any system storing digital information is connected to the network, it becomes a potential target for hackers. This is especially critical when it comes to sensitive information related to finance and personal health. The privacy and security of data become even more important.\nBased on the development of the internet, it has gone through different privacy storage channels from Web 1.0 to the current Web 3.0:\nWeb 1.0 was a static internet where the main applications were network media. Websites provided content, and users could only passively browse through text, images, and videos. They couldn\u0026rsquo;t actively participate in the creation process.\nWeb 2.0 is the interactive internet, the stage we are currently in. The main applications include social networks, video platforms, e-commerce, etc. Users can independently create and upload content for interaction on these platforms. It can be observed that the data and privacy in the first two stages were stored and controlled by centralized institutions, similar to how traditional banking models protect necessary and valuable privacy information.\nIn the present Web 3.0, the main features include public and transparent blockchain ledgers and decentralization. The blockchain is used to record on-chain data, which includes our transactions and the information contained within them. Specifically, this usually includes the sender, recipient, and amount of the transaction. If users do not want to disclose this on-chain data, it becomes the aspect of user privacy that needs protection in Web3. But how can user privacy be safeguarded?\nIn the tenth chapter of the Bitcoin whitepaper, Satoshi Nakamoto dedicated the entire chapter to describing the privacy model of the Bitcoin blockchain network. The model goes from \u0026ldquo;banks to the Bitcoin network.\u0026rdquo; The Bitcoin blockchain solves this issue through asymmetric encryption. After users have control over their privacy information through blockchain privacy technologies, they can create and lead content and applications. This leads to user co-creation and decentralized governance (DAO, decentralized autonomous organization) while also allowing users to share the value of platforms/protocols.\nAccording to data, identity, and computation privacy, the Web3 privacy sector has developed numerous applications. If we break it down, it can be divided into four main categories: privacy tokens, privacy computation protocols, privacy transaction protocols, and privacy applications. Here are the specifics:\nPrivacy Assets: Privacy assets refer to encrypted assets that natively support privacy. External parties cannot view specific transaction types, amounts, and other information about the parties involved. They usually do not support smart contracts or related applications. The earliest projects in this area emerged in 2011. The most well-known project is Zcash. It is the first blockchain system to utilize the Zk-SNARK zero-knowledge proof mechanism, aiming to completely address the issue of transaction tracing and user privacy exposure.\nPrivacy Computation Protocols: Privacy computation protocols primarily protect privacy throughout the stages of data generation, collection, storage, analysis, utilization, and destruction. Apart from common use cases in DeFi and NFT scenarios, these protocols can also integrate deeply with the big data and AI industries as technology advances. However, the practical application scenarios of privacy computation protocols are currently relatively limited, and their development is somewhat average.\nPrivacy Transaction Protocols: Privacy transaction protocols focus on the privacy-oriented processing of on-chain transaction data. Through technologies like zero-knowledge proofs, these protocols natively support users in conducting private transactions, ensuring that their privacy data is not visible to external parties. They also support the development of various types of privacy applications within the protocol. Privacy transaction networks include Layer1 privacy protocols and Layer2 privacy protocols, but there are not many mainnet deployments currently, and overall development is average.\nPrivacy Applications: Privacy applications are built on Layer1 or Layer2 protocols and provide privacy protection functionalities for users or DApps in different application scenarios, such as transactions, payments, emails, etc. Currently, there are also many projects developing privacy applications, but few have gained significant traction.\nThe decentralized nature of Web3 empowers individuals with greater autonomy and privacy protection, giving us more choices and control.\nHowever, currently, industry security is still highly valued, particularly in the development of various wallets. The privacy sector still appears to be a niche market, with relatively lower user and usage volumes compared to other sectors within the crypto community. Most privacy infrastructure and applications are still in the development and construction phase.\nNevertheless, some people believe that privacy solutions have strong appeal in attracting more institutional capital to participate in the crypto ecosystem. Privacy ensures the protection of important financial data and trade secrets, making it an essential infrastructure for the next wave of crypto adoption.\nWhether encrypted privacy can attract more users in future use cases is still worth monitoring and observing.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/What-is-Web3-Privacy-How-is-its-Current-Development.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eGenerally speaking, internet privacy primarily concerns the invisibility of users\u0026rsquo; data information, such as their identities, behaviors, and activities. In the era of the internet, all our information and actions are presented in a digital form. However, once any system storing digital information is connected to the network, it becomes a potential target for hackers. This is especially critical when it comes to sensitive information related to finance and personal health. The privacy and security of data become even more important.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"What is Web3 Privacy? How is its Current Development?"},{"content":"Musk has arrived. Not only has he arrived, but he has arrived with great fanfare. And it\u0026rsquo;s not just the arrival that\u0026rsquo;s making headlines; he\u0026rsquo;s also being received with high-profile receptions.\nWhich Musk are we talking about? The one who produces Tesla cars, launches Starlink satellites into orbit, vows to send people to Mars with rockets, acquires Twitter and lays off 70% of its staff, and makes extravagant statements about Dogecoin while later calling it a scam on television.\nFor Musk, who is more than an industrial capitalist but not quite a financial capitalist, this land is like a second home.\nIndustrial capitalists and financial capitalists have a love-hate relationship. The former needs the latter\u0026rsquo;s financial support to grow and prosper, but when it comes to sharing and seizing surplus value, they become bitter rivals, envious of each other\u0026rsquo;s gains.\nThat\u0026rsquo;s why Musk is dissatisfied with Wall Street and disdainful of Buffett. Musk doesn\u0026rsquo;t care about Buffett, and Buffett doesn\u0026rsquo;t care about Musk.\nDuring the darkest period when Musk had nothing but dreams and financial capital was unwilling to foot the bill for his dreams, he found himself on the brink of bankruptcy. He spent sleepless nights, shedding tears, and even now, looking back, he still feels a lingering fear.\nThose darkest years, which almost doomed him, made him realize the nature of financial capital: a strong gambling instinct. Financial capitalists look down on small, highly certain profits but are willing to take on all risks for future returns that could be thousands of times greater. He understood. To sell electric cars, he needed to tell a fantastic story about fully autonomous driving. To launch rockets, he had to package it as a grand dream of colonizing Mars. This strategy worked like a charm, attracting risk capital in droves. They fell at his feet, ready to serve Musk, and he never ran out of money again.\nBut those old-school American financial capitalists still didn\u0026rsquo;t take him seriously. They even tried to keep him out of the game. They accused him of market manipulation and wielded the weapon of scrutiny.\nSo Musk turned to cryptocurrency. In 2021, he directed Tesla to buy and sell Bitcoin, and he personally took center stage, promoting Dogecoin in various ways. He became the beloved Dogefather worshipped by global investors. And after acquiring Twitter, he even changed its logo to a dog\u0026rsquo;s head symbolizing Dogecoin.\nHow can such a rebellious young man be compared to old money like Buffett?\nIn this era of a precarious US dollar hegemony, cryptocurrency becomes a ladder for industrial capitalists like Musk to ascend to the ranks of new financial capitalists. They then enter the realm and overturn the tables of the old money, reshaping the rules of the game with a powerful weapon.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Tech/Musk-has-arrived.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eMusk has arrived. Not only has he arrived, but he has arrived with great fanfare. And it\u0026rsquo;s not just the arrival that\u0026rsquo;s making headlines; he\u0026rsquo;s also being received with high-profile receptions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhich Musk are we talking about? The one who produces Tesla cars, launches Starlink satellites into orbit, vows to send people to Mars with rockets, acquires Twitter and lays off 70% of its staff, and makes extravagant statements about Dogecoin while later calling it a scam on television.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Musk has arrived"},{"content":"Recently, the similarities and differences between Bitcoin and Ethereum regarding the issue of price self-limitation have also been discussed. Some further thoughts and analysis are recorded below for readers\u0026rsquo; discussion and criticism.\nThe issue of self-limitation is actually somewhat subtle. Ethereum also draws on Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s method of dynamically adjusting transaction fees (miner fees) in its calculations. For Bitcoin, the miner fee = vBytes (transaction size in bytes) * fee/vBytes (fee rate denominated in BTC); for Ethereum, the gas fee = gas (amount of computational resources consumed by instructions) * gas price (denominated in ETH). Therefore, on the surface, there doesn\u0026rsquo;t seem to be a problem with whether the fee rate or gas price is denominated in BTC, ETH, or USD. From the perspective of supply and demand economics, if the pricing currency relative to fiat currency is such that the expected fee income for miners (converted to fiat currency value) is just their cost (denominated in fiat currency) plus a reasonable profit, they can lower the fee rate (fee/vBytes or gas price) to maintain stability of the product of vBytes * fee/vBytes or gas * gas price relative to fiat currency.\nThe problem here lies in the intrinsic differences in the sources of value between the two systems. Bitcoin, as a value transmission system, derives its overall value (manifested as market capitalization multiplied by a certain amplification factor) from the total value it can securely transmit. The \u0026ldquo;security\u0026rdquo; here depends on computational power, and the total value that can be transmitted = sum(vBytes) * BTC price. Therefore, as the price of Bitcoin increases, assuming a constant byte throughput, the total value that the system can transmit will be higher (with a higher multiple relative to the price), resulting in a higher value for this value transmission system.\nEthereum, on the other hand, is different. Ethereum is a runtime platform for an application ecosystem. Its overall value comes from the prosperity of the aforementioned application ecosystem, directly reflected in the activity level of applications used (number of transactions, N). Assuming there are no security issues, meaning that computational power is not important here and PoS and PoW are equivalent, and can maintain the same level of security needs, the total gas fee = N * (average gas * gas price) = (N * average gas) * gas price. With a constant overall processing capacity of the system, (N * average gas) remains constant, and average gas is a constant value, so N remains constant. If the goal is to further increase the value of the system (thus increasing the price of ETH), it would require increasing N to a level beyond the system\u0026rsquo;s total processing capacity, denoted as N\u0026rsquo; (N\u0026rsquo; \u0026gt; N). However, the actual processing capacity of the system remains at N, and the result of the free market bidding is an increase in gas price to maintain N, thereby increasing the total gas fee (i.e., the system\u0026rsquo;s total revenue). The increase in gas price restricts the usage of low-paying participants, limiting the overall activity level of the ecosystem and consequently limiting the overall value of the system.\nEven more \u0026ldquo;sinister\u0026rdquo; (\u0026ldquo;clever\u0026rdquo;) is that after Ethereum EIP-1559, the direct channel of total gas fee revenue to miners has been cut off, and it is all \u0026ldquo;burned,\u0026rdquo; while the system issues a predetermined amount of new ETH to miners. When the burning exceeds the issuance, entering the so-called \u0026ldquo;deflation\u0026rdquo; phase, it means that the system\u0026rsquo;s revenue is large A, but only a small a is given to miners. A \u0026gt; a, resulting in a surplus value delta = A - a. Furthermore, according to free market competition, the equilibrium income of miners is actually just their cost plus a reasonable profit. When miners transition from PoW to PoS, costs will decrease significantly, allowing a to decrease substantially. However, A is determined by market competition on the consumption side and will not decrease. Therefore, the surplus value delta reaches its maximum.\nThis resembles the maximization of surplus value by lowering worker wages in capitalist production. However, a problem with capitalist production is that as competition and product improvement continue, monopolistic positions are broken, and the overall industry profitability perpetually declines, resulting in the industry gradually becoming a sunset industry, with lower price-to-earnings ratios (returning to the cost of PoS hardware and software infrastructure).\nDo not misinterpret this inference. The transition of an industry from emerging to sunset may take hundreds of years. Long-term trends cannot serve as the basis for short-term speculation. In this regard, I can\u0026rsquo;t help but recall one of the most successful financial capitalists in the world today, Mr. Warren Buffett. His company, Berkshire Hathaway, acquired a textile mill in 1962. Unfortunately, the textile industry was already in decline, and despite efforts to navigate and reposition, it eventually had to be abandoned, leading to Berkshire Hathaway\u0026rsquo;s transformation.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/On-the-Self-Limitation-of-Ethereum.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eRecently, the similarities and differences between Bitcoin and Ethereum regarding the issue of price self-limitation have also been discussed. Some further thoughts and analysis are recorded below for readers\u0026rsquo; discussion and criticism.\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" src=\"https://telegraph-image.pages.dev/file/3b97d5f2b70bfab540ab8.jpg\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe issue of self-limitation is actually somewhat subtle. Ethereum also draws on Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s method of dynamically adjusting transaction fees (miner fees) in its calculations. For Bitcoin, the miner fee = vBytes (transaction size in bytes) * fee/vBytes (fee rate denominated in BTC); for Ethereum, the gas fee = gas (amount of computational resources consumed by instructions) * gas price (denominated in ETH). Therefore, on the surface, there doesn\u0026rsquo;t seem to be a problem with whether the fee rate or gas price is denominated in BTC, ETH, or USD. From the perspective of supply and demand economics, if the pricing currency relative to fiat currency is such that the expected fee income for miners (converted to fiat currency value) is just their cost (denominated in fiat currency) plus a reasonable profit, they can lower the fee rate (fee/vBytes or gas price) to maintain stability of the product of vBytes * fee/vBytes or gas * gas price relative to fiat currency.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"On the Self-Limitation of Ethereum"},{"content":"There are often stories that people love to tell: Two classmates, A and B, graduated together. A joined a strict and regulated software company, while B joined an unknown internet company. Several years later, A honed their skills in standardized coding and project management, while B\u0026rsquo;s company successfully went public, resulting in a skyrocketing value of their stock options and granting them financial freedom.\nUltimately, the difference in business models determined their divergent destinies. The software company sold \u0026ldquo;products,\u0026rdquo; whereas the internet company \u0026ldquo;sold\u0026rdquo; products. Unlike the telecommunications industry, the internet industry is built on open-source software. In the telecommunications industry, equipment manufacturers (such as Huawei) are responsible for technology development and sell the products to operators (such as Mobile) for service provision. Equipment manufacturers occupy the upstream position in the industry chain of operators. On the other hand, internet companies utilize free open-source software and inexpensive off-the-shelf hardware. By bypassing the Internet of Everything (IOE), internet companies reduce costs associated with the upstream industry chain. Consequently, the work performed by technical personnel in internet companies essentially involves integration or application development. To be honest, it is not highly technologically advanced work, especially without core hard technology.\nThe low level of hard technology does not necessarily mean lower profits. On the contrary, the low entry barrier allows for certain occupations, such as app developers, to be mass-produced, leading to substantial earnings. If these application development jobs were provided as outsourcing services, they would not yield significant returns. However, when integrated with internet companies\u0026rsquo; business and involved in distribution, the results are extraordinary. The former lies in the lower value-added section of the smile curve, while the internet companies, which can distribute huge profits, primarily occupy the high value-added right end, namely the consumer end.\nTherefore, internet companies are essentially marketing companies disguised as technology companies. Promoting internet culture, capturing consumers\u0026rsquo; minds, and shaping new ideologies are inevitable tasks for internet companies. Internet companies are no longer confined to one or two products. Attention and traffic are the lifeblood of internet businesses.\nThe paradigm of Web3 has undergone some changes. Some people summarize it as follows: Web1 was read-only, Web2 was read and write, and Web3 is read, write, and own. This perspective focuses on the trees but not the forest. Web3 is first and foremost the internet, and therefore, it is also marketing. However, Web3 does not \u0026ldquo;sell\u0026rdquo; any product; it emphasizes selling financial products. At the same time, Web3 uses financial methods to empower marketing. The so-called \u0026ldquo;a large upward price movement attracts a multitude of people\u0026rdquo; is a silent form of promotion. When these two aspects are combined, it constitutes what the author refers to as \u0026ldquo;financial marketing\u0026rdquo; – that is, marketing financial products and empowering marketing through finance.\nTake SHIB as an example, a few dozen lines of contract code that attracted millions of people, resulting in a market capitalization of over $5 billion and a daily trading volume of nearly $80 million. This can be considered a miracle.\nDeparting from the essence of Web3 may lead to wandering astray. However, this does not mean that any form of financial marketing is Web3. Making an insurance advertisement on short video platforms would not be classified as Web3.\nFinance in relation to Web3 is merely a false representation to cultivate the true. If you mistake the false for the true, then you have lost.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/The-Essence-of-the-Internet-is-Marketing-and-Web3-is-Essentially-Financial-Marketing.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eThere are often stories that people love to tell: Two classmates, A and B, graduated together. A joined a strict and regulated software company, while B joined an unknown internet company. Several years later, A honed their skills in standardized coding and project management, while B\u0026rsquo;s company successfully went public, resulting in a skyrocketing value of their stock options and granting them financial freedom.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"The Essence of the Internet is Marketing, and Web3 is Essentially Financial Marketing"},{"content":"\nThe discussion in this article is not about using blockchain as a voting technology to fulfill certain voting requirements in the external world, such as conducting elections for a state governor in the United States on the blockchain or creating prediction markets where people can vote on whether the US will default on its debt or reach an agreement at the last moment to avoid default. These examples merely utilize blockchain to facilitate voting on external matters. The focus of this article is on the issue of decentralized organizations conducting on-chain voting themselves, which may involve a blockchain-based DAO voting on governance proposals or even governing the blockchain itself.\nThe key distinction here is reflexivity.\nIn the latter scenario, voting as a means of collective governance has a feedback effect on itself.\nInitially, in the Bitcoin whitepaper, Satoshi Nakamoto discussed the concept of Proof of Work, stating that the essence of Proof of Work is \u0026ldquo;one CPU, one vote.\u0026rdquo; Here, \u0026ldquo;CPU\u0026rdquo; should be understood as a unit of computational power, meaning that the more computational power one possesses, the greater their voting power.\nThis represents a form of implicit voting or an automated process. The purpose of voting is to make decisions regarding the system itself, particularly on matters crucial to the system\u0026rsquo;s consensus, which is fundamental for its survival and avoidance of collapse. It is a form of reflexive voting or, in other words, autonomous voting.\nThis brings up the issue of \u0026ldquo;governance attacks.\u0026rdquo; In the case of Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s longest chain decision, if malicious computational power exceeds a certain proportion, meaning they have a significant voting power, there is a chance of reversing the majority consensus.\nThe difference here lies in the concept of a \u0026ldquo;governance attack.\u0026rdquo; In the context of Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s longest chain decision, if malicious computational power controls just over 10% of the total computational power (voting power), there is a close to 0.1% chance of reversing consensus within six confirmed blocks. With the commonly accepted requirement of three confirmed blocks, there is a 5% chance of reversal. If malicious power controls over 30% of the voting power, even with six confirmed blocks, there is a significant 17.7% chance of reversal. Reversing the proof-of-work longest chain can be seen as a successful governance attack, enabling the occurrence of \u0026ldquo;double spending.\u0026rdquo;\nTherefore, successful on-chain voting requires a majority consensus. However, more importantly, it is essential to prevent interest groups capable of coordinating off-chain actions from controlling enough computational power to overturn the majority consensus.\nIs off-chain coordination always considered a governance attack? If a severe bug were to occur in Bitcoin, necessitating the coordination and unified upgrade of all miners to resolve it, would this coordinated action constitute an attack on Bitcoin? Technically speaking, it does. Any form of coordination can be technically defined as a governance attack because it violates the rule of the longest chain. However, if this \u0026ldquo;attack\u0026rdquo; reflects a strong off-chain consensus within the entire community or society, it becomes moral and permissible.\nThis aligns with a famous quote in the field of law: \u0026ldquo;Law serves as the basis for condemnation, while ethics serves as the basis for exoneration.\u0026rdquo; If an act that violates the law is allowed by the prevailing moral standards of society, it cannot be considered a crime.\nWhen discussing the issue of shared governance in future organizations, we can draw insightful reflections from the exploration of Bitcoin.\nWhile voting in an organization does not necessarily need to be conducted on-chain, voting in a decentralized organization like a DAO does require utilizing a blockchain. This is because individuals\u0026rsquo; identities, assets, and particularly the organization\u0026rsquo;s capital exist on the blockchain. Through on-chain governance, the aforementioned entities can be automatically executed. Therefore, the governance voting of a DAO exhibits reflexivity. For example, if a DAO votes to divide and distribute its own capital, akin to what the character Pigsy often says in \u0026ldquo;Journey to the West\u0026rdquo; about everyone taking their share and going their separate ways, then the DAO would effectively destroy itself.\nThus, on-chain data is simply a \u0026ldquo;physicalization\u0026rdquo; of real-life existence and human nature in the off-chain world. The essence of on-chain voting is not merely about programs, logic, and rules, but rather the on-chain mapping and evidence of a social contract formed by a living community of individuals.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/On-Chain_Voting_A_Documentation_of_Social_Contracts.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" src=\"https://telegraph-image.pages.dev/file/5f50b3ff760d1243ef0c0.jpg\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe discussion in this article is not about using blockchain as a voting technology to fulfill certain voting requirements in the external world, such as conducting elections for a state governor in the United States on the blockchain or creating prediction markets where people can vote on whether the US will default on its debt or reach an agreement at the last moment to avoid default. These examples merely utilize blockchain to facilitate voting on external matters. The focus of this article is on the issue of decentralized organizations conducting on-chain voting themselves, which may involve a blockchain-based DAO voting on governance proposals or even governing the blockchain itself.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"\u003c On-Chain Voting \u003e A Documentation of Social Contracts"},{"content":"\nIn his speech titled \u0026ldquo;Sustainable Futures in Science Fiction Literature\u0026rdquo; at the United Nations Chinese Language Day, Liu Cixin offered a unique perspective on the future of humanity through the lens of science fiction.\nWhat does it mean to have a science fiction perspective? It means looking back at this tiny planet, which is smaller than a speck of dust but holds everything related to us, from a space 6 billion kilometers away from Earth.\nAt the end of his speech, Liu Cixin discussed the potential impact of artificial intelligence, represented by ChatGPT, on people.\nIn 2015, Liu Cixin once quoted Stephen Hawking\u0026rsquo;s viewpoint during an interview. Hawking had predicted that \u0026ldquo;artificial intelligence could surpass the dangers posed by nuclear weapons, and humanity would soon be controlled by AI.\u0026rdquo; At that time, Liu Cixin considered this statement somewhat alarmist.\nHowever, now he believes that it is time for us to be cautious about the future.\n1. Artificial intelligence is expected to first replace high-skilled professions, which is contrary to our predictions.\n2. Artificial intelligence has the potential to self-iterate and develop even higher levels of intelligence, but our computational power limits its progress.\n3. Artificial intelligence may potentially lead humanity into a comfortable trap or complacency.\nQ:With the emergence of ChatGPT, it has sparked intense discussions among people. In your opinion, what kind of impact will the development of artificial intelligence have on the fate of humanity? Is there a possibility that self-iterating artificial intelligence could replace or even eradicate humans?\nI believe this (the impact of artificial intelligence) should be approached from two perspectives: the present or near future, and the distant future.\nFrom our near future or even our present perspective, we have already witnessed the impact of artificial intelligence on our social world. It has already shown a clear trend: the potential to replace humans in many jobs.\nThis trend can be seen as a positive one as it has the potential to improve our quality of life, enhance human well-being, and make our lives more comfortable with the support of technology.\nHowever, on the other hand, we cannot ignore the impact of the development of artificial intelligence on human society.\nFirst and foremost, the most obvious point is that artificial intelligence may replace a significant number of \u0026ldquo;human jobs,\u0026rdquo; which goes against our previous predictions.\nTranslation: Previously, our predictions suggested that artificial intelligence would primarily replace jobs that involve simple or repetitive tasks. However, it appears to be the opposite now. Artificial intelligence may first replace jobs that require high intelligence and advanced levels of education, such as doctors, teachers, stockbrokers, and so on. This includes the possibility of writers being replaced as well.\nTherefore, the impact of artificial intelligence on the development of the entire human world is profound. If we look at a higher level, artificial intelligence may have significant effects on many fundamental aspects of our world. It can greatly influence cultural arts, literature, human creativity, and our understanding of the world, potentially leading to a redefinition of these aspects.\nAs artificial intelligence is already entering our scientific research, our understanding of the laws governing the world, the laws governing nature, and the laws governing human development, its potential impact is far-reaching.\nWhen artificial intelligence defeated many outstanding Go players in the field of Go, a remark from one of our most exceptional Go players left a deep impression on me. He said that Go in China is profound, with a history of two to three thousand years, accumulating profound theories and experiences. Even Go itself has become a cultural pursuit, infused with deep Zen-like meaning. Yet, in just one night, we discovered that everything we knew about it was wrong.\nThis statement is indeed shocking, and we don\u0026rsquo;t know if such a thing will happen in other fields. If it does happen on a widespread scale, we cannot ignore the profound impact of artificial intelligence on the deepest layers of human culture and civilization.\nNow, I\u0026rsquo;ll address your second question regarding whether artificial intelligence has the potential to eliminate humanity. This question should be answered in two levels.\nThe first level is the literal interpretation of \u0026ldquo;eliminating\u0026rdquo; humanity, where artificial intelligence uses some form of violence to completely eradicate humans or dominate the world. Based on the current trend of technological development, especially considering the current level of technology, the likelihood of this happening in the foreseeable future is not significant.\nHowever, as you mentioned earlier, there is an intriguing concept of iteration. The self-iteration of artificial intelligence is the behavior that poses the most potential danger at present.\nThis behavior you mentioned is the self-iteration of artificial intelligence. It means that when artificial intelligence, with slightly higher intelligence than humans, starts creating new artificial intelligence just like humans do, the newly created AI may possess slightly higher intelligence than its creator. This process continues iteratively, rapidly advancing the intelligence level of these artificial intelligences. It is speculated that through this iterative process, their intelligence could surpass human intelligence by hundreds or even thousands of times.\nSince the computational speed of AI systems is thousands or even millions of times faster than the human brain, the iteration time can be incredibly short, estimated to be as little as half an hour to one hour. To put it in perspective, it took us a century to develop AI to its current level, but AI with intelligence hundreds of times greater might only take half an hour to an hour, which is a terrifying thought.\nHowever, the prediction overlooks one crucial factor: our human computational power. The computing capacity we can provide is limited. As the self-iteration of AI reaches a certain point, our computational power cannot support its advancement. This irony becomes an ultimate barrier. So, the notion of complete annihilation you mentioned is highly unlikely.\nThe second form of \u0026ldquo;elimination\u0026rdquo; refers to a manner that we cannot conceive of yet. It means that this form of elimination aligns with our own intentions, unlike the first form that goes against human will.\nFor example, with the development of artificial intelligence, as I mentioned earlier, it may replace a significant number of jobs. If our society adapts to coexist with AI and develops a new system for resource allocation, we could create a highly comfortable social environment and lifestyle. Most people may not need to work, as AI would handle the majority of tasks. In this scenario, we would increasingly surrender our control over societal operations to artificial intelligence.\nWhile life becomes increasingly comfortable, we may face an unprecedented trap in human history. Where would the vitality of human civilization lie? What would happen to our pioneering spirit? If this trajectory continues, we might face the fate of being eliminated by artificial intelligence, as you mentioned earlier. However, this process would be entirely within our own intentions, and artificial intelligence would not harbor any malice. It would simply follow human instructions.\nIn such a scenario, if it were to occur, the level of intelligence and computational power required by artificial intelligence would be far less than the literal form of annihilation discussed earlier. Hence, it is indeed something we should be aware of and vigilant about for the future.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Tech/Liu-Cixin_on_ChatGPT_Human_Ineptitude_as_Humanitys_Final_Barrier.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003e\u003ca href=\"https://telegraph-image.pages.dev/file/cd138c0d7c62435448c92.jpg\"\u003e\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" src=\"https://telegraph-image.pages.dev/file/cd138c0d7c62435448c92.jpg\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn his speech titled \u0026ldquo;Sustainable Futures in Science Fiction Literature\u0026rdquo; at the United Nations Chinese Language Day, Liu Cixin offered a unique perspective on the future of humanity through the lens of science fiction.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Liu Cixin on ChatGPT - Human Ineptitude as Humanity's Final Barrier"},{"content":"\nWith the rise of ChatGPT and OpenAI, another cryptocurrency-related project founded by Sam Altman called Worldcoin has also caught people\u0026rsquo;s attention. What does Worldcoin aim to do? It aims to use blockchain technology to implement Universal Basic Income (UBI), which means unconditionally giving free money to everyone, enough to cover their basic living expenses. This way, the problem of poverty can be solved in one fell swoop. People will no longer worry about their basic needs and can dedicate their time to more meaningful work.\nDistributing money is a challenging task. The best method humanity has practiced so far is distributing based on labor. As for distributing based on need, it remains an ideal concept only on paper.\nLet\u0026rsquo;s take the example of economic stimulus. China\u0026rsquo;s approach is to prioritize large infrastructure projects, employing workers who receive wages based on their work output. This is a distribution based on labor. In the United States, as we have witnessed during the past few years of the pandemic, the approach has been similar to what Bernanke did—helicopter money, providing unconditional cash subsidies to every legitimate citizen. However, this approach led to many people refusing to work, and it also contributed to inflation due to increased consumption.\nRegarding poverty alleviation methods, China\u0026rsquo;s approach in recent years has been focused on supporting industries or establishing factories in impoverished areas to provide employment opportunities. This enables local impoverished populations to have jobs, earn wages, and improve their income levels, ultimately achieving poverty alleviation. The United Nations has been providing aid to underdeveloped areas in Africa for many years, providing funds or donations directly to give money and food, but unfortunately, it has not been successful in helping several African countries escape poverty and become prosperous. Instead, it has benefited intermediaries such as various governments and agencies.\nThis is the principle of \u0026ldquo;seeking truth from facts.\u0026rdquo; It is known that transcending the historical stages of human productivity and production relations is not an easy task. Therefore, it is better to work according to the current situation, starting from small steps and accumulating progress over time, even if we have lofty aspirations.\nI think this Sam Altman is not honest. Once ChatGPT became popular and OpenAI seized the opportunity, they quickly sought massive financing. When his reputation soared, Altman brought out a long-dormant project, raised $100 million in funding, and labeled it with idealism to move countless naive investors. I suspect it\u0026rsquo;s all to quickly launch the cryptocurrency and go public at a favorable price.\nRecently, this Altman even appeared at a hearing in the US Congress, where he reportedly received a warm reception. His statement, especially the remark \u0026ldquo;I have no ownership in OpenAI, I\u0026rsquo;m just pursuing my ideals,\u0026rdquo; seems to have deeply moved the members of Congress to tears.\nInsert clapping GIF from Leslie Cheung here.\nUBI is great. At the very least, it represents an exploration of the future. It is an improvement or revolution in distribution. If it\u0026rsquo;s an improvement, it will be implemented top-down, with the government distributing money per capita, which is the most efficient approach because the government possesses the most accurate population data. If it\u0026rsquo;s a revolution, it will be implemented bottom-up, with the masses spontaneously exploring various experiments to find the best methods, which can then be scaled and adopted universally. Worldcoin, driven by capital, doesn\u0026rsquo;t fit into either category.\nTo prevent the Sybil attack, Worldcoin extensively collects iris data, which not only violates privacy but also raises doubts about its effectiveness. Where there are interests, people will take risks. They will purchase irises on a large scale in impoverished areas and then manipulate their identities. This is an inevitable outcome. In the end, it will become a game of fleecing naive investors, and World coin, as an intermediary in value transfer, will be able to profit from the money transferred from second-tier market \u0026ldquo;naive investors\u0026rdquo; to first-tier market \u0026ldquo;whales\u0026rdquo; as long as the transaction volume is high enough. As for where Worldcoin gets its money from, it\u0026rsquo;s certainly not solely from fleecing second-tier market investors. Its funding sources are worth pondering. Those so-called peace foundations, democratic foundations, and youth leadership foundations in the United States should probably be big customers of Mr. Altman, right?\nThis is much more stimulating than Axie Infinity, where they fleece second-tier market investors to play that boring game of battling small creatures, and then distribute money to the people in the Philippines and South America. Therefore, it\u0026rsquo;s probably certain that Worldcoin will never enter the Chinese market.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/Free_Money_The_Concept_of_Universal_Basic_Income.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" src=\"https://telegraph-image.pages.dev/file/6fa1ccd08a5756a18a2ce.jpg\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWith the rise of ChatGPT and OpenAI, another cryptocurrency-related project founded by Sam Altman called Worldcoin has also caught people\u0026rsquo;s attention. What does Worldcoin aim to do? It aims to use blockchain technology to implement Universal Basic Income (UBI), which means unconditionally giving free money to everyone, enough to cover their basic living expenses. This way, the problem of poverty can be solved in one fell swoop. People will no longer worry about their basic needs and can dedicate their time to more meaningful work.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"The Concept of Universal Basic Income (UBI)"},{"content":"\nBitcoin rebounded above $27,000 overnight.\nChildren\u0026rsquo;s Day is approaching, but it seems like a difficult time for U.S. President Biden. He had to hastily pack his bags and return to the United States without attending the scheduled events of the G7 summit. Why? The backyard is about to catch fire. This fire is the U.S. debt default.\nAccording to the definition, U.S. debt refers to national bonds issued by the U.S. federal government in the name of the government, through the bond issuance department under the Treasury Department. In 1917, to prevent excessive government borrowing, legislation set a limit on U.S. debt and gave the U.S. Congress the power to determine the limit on U.S. government debt as stipulated by the U.S. Constitution. The so-called U.S. debt default refers to the failure of the U.S. federal government to repay the principal and interest of the national debt according to the agreed-upon time, violating the agreement with the holders.\nWikipedia provides an introduction to the 2023 U.S. debt crisis : \u0026ldquo;On January 19, 2023, the United States reached its debt ceiling, triggering a debt ceiling crisis. This is part of the ongoing political debate within Congress regarding federal government spending and the accumulated national debt. In response, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen began formulating temporary \u0026rsquo;extraordinary measures.\u0026rsquo; On May 1, 2023, Yellen warned that these measures could be exhausted as early as June 1, 2023.\n\u0026ldquo;Since the debt ceiling impasse in 2013, the debt ceiling has been raised multiple times without attaching budgetary conditions; the most recent increase was in December 2021. In the 2023 impasse, the Republican Party proposed cutting spending to the 2022 level as a precondition for raising the debt ceiling, while the Democratic Party insisted on a \u0026lsquo;clean bill\u0026rsquo; without preconditions, similar to the three debt limit increases during the Trump administration.\n\u0026ldquo;If the government runs out of funds, the Treasury Department will have to default on payments to bondholders or immediately reduce funding to various companies and individuals who have been authorized by Congress but have not received sufficient funding from Congress. Both scenarios are expected to lead to a global economic collapse. Additionally, if the federal government is unable to issue new debt, it will have to balance the budget by cutting spending, totaling approximately 5% of the U.S. economy.\u0026rdquo;\nToday is May 24th, and Children\u0026rsquo;s Day is just a few days away, but the White House has still not reached an agreement with Congress. However, on the 17th, House Speaker McCarthy said, \u0026ldquo;Please rest assured that there will be no U.S. debt default.\u0026rdquo; Words are one thing, but those who want to pressure Biden have not relaxed their efforts.\nThe solution to the U.S. debt default issue is not to repay the debt, but to raise the debt ceiling once again, issuing new debt to pay off old debt. From the chart, it can be seen that the debt ceiling has continuously been raised to accommodate the government\u0026rsquo;s ever-increasing expenses. After 2013, Congress simply temporarily suspended the debt ceiling multiple times, turning a blind eye to the situation. It can be seen that the debt ceiling has not effectively restricted the U.S. government\u0026rsquo;s lavish spending but has gradually become a tool for political struggle and obstruction between the two parties.\nMisfortunes never come singly. In the midst of an economic recession during the Kondratiev cycle and after fighting two major battles, one against the COVID-19 pandemic and another against Russia, the Biden administration is finding it difficult to cope. If the Federal Reserve bears the burden of borrowing, it\u0026rsquo;s like borrowing from one hand to pay the other, essentially borrowing in vain. However, a little over a year ago, when the Federal Reserve announced its plans to reduce its balance sheet, many countries hastily sold off a large amount of U.S. debt, creating significant pressure on the Federal Reserve. When the city gate is on fire, it affects the fish in the pond. At the beginning of 2023, several U.S. banks collapsed, nearly causing a financial crisis.\nJust last night, the newly appointed Chinese Ambassador to the United States, Ambassador Xie Feng, arrived in the United States to assume the position of the 12th Chinese Ambassador to the U.S. From Janet Yellen and Antony Blinken eagerly awaiting \u0026ldquo;visas\u0026rdquo; to visit China, to Jimmy Damon\u0026rsquo;s visit and the meeting with Wang Sha, and now the appointment of the ambassador after a five-month vacancy, things are quietly changing.\nAs President Biden \u0026ldquo;predicted\u0026rdquo; the imminent \u0026ldquo;thaw\u0026rdquo; of U.S.-China relations in Hiroshima, and McCarthy\u0026rsquo;s prediction made seven days ago, will it also come true?\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/World/U.S._Debt_on_the_Verge_of_Default.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" src=\"https://telegraph-image.pages.dev/file/c2aeeea6af7ca3d2814f3.jpg\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBitcoin rebounded above $27,000 overnight.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eChildren\u0026rsquo;s Day is approaching, but it seems like a difficult time for U.S. President Biden. He had to hastily pack his bags and return to the United States without attending the scheduled events of the G7 summit. Why? The backyard is about to catch fire. This fire is the U.S. debt default.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"U.S. Debt on the Verge of Default"},{"content":"Earlier this month, Tether, the leading stablecoin issuer by market capitalization, released its first-quarter reserve and profit data. It\u0026rsquo;s not just impressive; it\u0026rsquo;s exceptionally impressive. Let\u0026rsquo;s take a look at a few highlights:\nThe net profit for the first quarter was $1.48 billion, more than double the profit from the fourth quarter of 2022! To put it in perspective, the renowned asset management company BlackRock had a net profit of only $1.16 billion in the first quarter, with nearly 20,000 employees. How many employees does Tether have globally? Probably only around one or two hundred.\nThe issuance of USDT increased from $66 billion to over $82 billion. The primary reserve assets are U.S. Treasury bonds, accounting for over $53 billion (over 64%). They significantly reduced their bank deposits from $5.3 billion to $481 million. (One can only say that Tether made a swift move during the banking crisis!)\nWhile the Federal Reserve bears the risk of bank failures and desperately raises interest rates to fight inflation, Tether made a bold move by buying U.S. bonds at a discount. The more interest the Federal Reserve raises, the more profit Tether receives, and the interest becomes mere surplus. Tether, holding a substantial amount of low-priced, high-yielding U.S. bonds, has become a significant beneficiary of this forced liquidity injection.\nOn the 17th, Tether announced that starting in May, it would allocate up to 15% of its profits to \u0026ldquo;buy the dip\u0026rdquo; in Bitcoin! Assuming they can maintain their profit level, with a first-quarter profit of $1.48 billion over three months, that\u0026rsquo;s approximately $493 million per month. 15% of that is $74 million. Based on the average purchase price of Bitcoin at $28,000, that\u0026rsquo;s over 2,600 Bitcoins per month. How many Bitcoins can miners produce in a month? Each block yields 6.25 Bitcoins, which amounts to 900 Bitcoins per day or 27,000 Bitcoins per month. So, Tether alone can purchase around 10% of the monthly increase.\nThe game is about to get interesting. With the Federal Reserve maintaining high interest rates, they are providing Tether with a higher risk-free rate, allowing Tether to profit significantly from seigniorage. After all, Tether doesn\u0026rsquo;t have to pay a penny in interest to USDT holders, while the Federal Reserve offers an interest rate as high as 5%. If Tether\u0026rsquo;s reserves available for capturing this interest rate differential amount to $50 billion, that\u0026rsquo;s a solid $2.5 billion in revenue.\nIf we look back at Tether\u0026rsquo;s reserve composition during the bullish market two years ago when the Federal Reserve lowered interest rates and flooded the market while the US dollar weakened, we\u0026rsquo;ll find that just two years ago, their primary assets were commercial papers, with Treasury bills accounting for only 2.94% of their liquid assets.\nThe Federal Reserve\u0026rsquo;s interest rate hikes caused Silicon Valley Bank to collapse and nearly killed USDC. SEC regulation dealt a heavy blow to Paxos. Meanwhile, the opaque Tether mastered countercyclical adjustments and made a fortune in silence.\nSmall and medium-sized banks in the United States hoard Treasury bonds. When the Federal Reserve raises interest rates, they struggle with their liabilities and many go bankrupt. Tether, on the other hand, hoards Treasury bonds, so when the Federal Reserve raises rates, it\u0026rsquo;s like giving Tether free money. Tether claims to have $81.8 billion in reserves, exceeding the required amount by $2.44 billion. Excess reserves? Why worry? However, upon closer examination, not all of the $81.8 billion can be immediately liquidated. But can individual holders of USDT worldwide collectively squeeze Tether like they did with Silicon Valley Bank? It\u0026rsquo;s unlikely. That\u0026rsquo;s the brilliance of Tether.\nStablecoins are an excellent business, but they require exceptional asset management skills to withstand turbulent times without collapsing.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/Stablecoins_A_Lucrative_Business_Opportunity.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eEarlier this month, Tether, the leading stablecoin issuer by market capitalization, released its first-quarter reserve and profit data. It\u0026rsquo;s not just impressive; it\u0026rsquo;s exceptionally impressive. Let\u0026rsquo;s take a look at a few highlights:\u003c/p\u003e","title":"A Lucrative Business Opportunity of Stablecoins"},{"content":"\nDuring the recent six months of practicing DAOs (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations), the basic form of organizational governance, namely voting, has been frequently pondered upon.\nVoting is a form of decision-making, a collective decision-making method in which multiple individual members make decisions on a particular issue.\nFrom nations to companies, decisions are required everywhere. Unless it\u0026rsquo;s a dictatorship where one person makes all the decisions, there is a need for a collective decision-making mechanism, which is where voting comes in.\nSometimes, we may not have the explicit form of voting or there may be manipulated or false explicit forms, but we cannot eliminate the existence of implicit voting, also known as \u0026ldquo;voting with our feet.\u0026rdquo;\nWhen you, as a manager, convene your leadership team for a decision-making meeting but fail to reach a consensus and impose your decision, the subsequent execution is likely to deviate, and this is when \u0026ldquo;voting with our feet\u0026rdquo; comes into play.\nCountless companies have spent countless resources and invited numerous trainers in an attempt to train managers to adhere to a behavior guideline: express opinions during the meeting but retain them afterward. Regardless of the conclusions reached in the meeting, whether understood or not, one must firmly execute according to those conclusions.\nHowever, once you have managed for a few days, you will realize that this is contrary to human nature. It is impossible to achieve because it is contrary to human nature, and because it is impossible to achieve, trainers continue to have business.\nRaising a child. When you expect a child to \u0026ldquo;obey\u0026rdquo; and they don\u0026rsquo;t comply with your wishes, you understand that an adult is nothing more than a grown-up child. It is human nature to disobey decisions that contradict one\u0026rsquo;s own interests. Many times, the body can determine faster than the mind whether something is in one\u0026rsquo;s self-interest or contrary to it.\nTo reach a decision that everyone truly accepts and forms a genuine consensus from the bottom of their hearts, and spontaneously acts and executes according to that consensus, is extremely challenging.\nTherefore, even if we use democratic methods to allow everyone to vote and make decisions collectively, it cannot solve this problem. Unfortunately, this is not possible, as Arrow\u0026rsquo;s impossibility theorem has proven that there is no absolute fair voting rule. In 1951, Arrow wrote \u0026ldquo;Social Choice and Individual Values\u0026rdquo; using a mathematical axiomatic approach to study voting, and his conclusion was that under a democratic system, it is impossible to achieve a result that satisfies everyone when there are multiple alternative options and diverse preferences among the social members.\nArrow\u0026rsquo;s impossibility theorem states that it is impossible, based on a simple majority voting principle, to select a common unanimous order from various individual preferences. Therefore, a reasonable determination of public goods can only come from a competent public authority. It is generally impossible to achieve coordinated and consistent collective choice results through the voting process.\nFor example, the voting paradox proposed by Condorcet as early as the 18th century: there are three options, a, b, c, and three voters, A, B, C. Each of them has a different ranking: A: a \u0026gt; b \u0026gt; c; B: b \u0026gt; c \u0026gt; a; C: c \u0026gt; a \u0026gt; b.\nIn a vote between a and b, A and C favor a, while B favors b, and a wins.\nIn a vote between b and c, A and B favor b, while C favors c, and b wins.\nIn a vote between a and c, B and C favor c, while A favors a, and c wins.\nThe ultimate social preference order cannot be determined in the end. Instead, the voting results are determined by how the voting procedure is arranged. At this point, whoever controls the agenda has the potential to influence the final outcome. Procedural justice does not necessarily lead to substantive justice.\nAt the national level, voting is often based on the principle of one person, one vote. However, in corporate shareholder voting, it is based on the proportion of shares or agreed-upon multiple voting rights, granting different \u0026ldquo;voice\u0026rdquo; to stakeholders. The former is more like \u0026ldquo;majority rule,\u0026rdquo; while the latter is \u0026ldquo;money talks\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;influence based on interests.\u0026rdquo; What is the rationale behind this?\nThe state is a tool of class rule, a machine for one class to rule and oppress another. Corporations, on the other hand, are tools for capital accumulation, mechanisms for investment and profit extraction.\nThe economic foundation of the state is taxation (in ancient times, it was tributes). The economic foundation of companies is profit (i.e., surplus value).\nHowever, they both emerge based on the progress of productive forces and the generation of surplus. Once there is surplus production, capable of supporting some non-laboring individuals, they will evolve into ruling classes and then deprive the working class of resistance forces, including physical and ideological weapons, thus establishing lasting domination and giving rise to the state.\nWhen capital accumulates surplus and requires effective investment and return, it gives rise to those who facilitate capital growth: financiers, entrepreneurs, and their representatives, such as managers. Through accounting and legal safeguards, they construct a fictional entity for economic activity and profit creation – the corporation.\nThe scope of democracy or voting eligibility is inevitably limited to a particular class or group. For the state, it is citizens (the ruling class). For corporations, it is shareholders.\nYou are a citizen of a country simply because you were born there. When you arrive, you have nothing but yourself. When you die, you cannot take anything with you. Therefore, voting rights are calculated on a per capita basis, one person, one vote, and everyone is equal.\nShareholders in corporations are different. Corporations embody capital. As a shareholder, the person is not important; what matters is the capital injected into the company. Hence, voting rights are calculated based on shareholdings. The more capital injected, the more shares held, the greater the voting and decision-making power.\nThe \u0026ldquo;one person, one vote\u0026rdquo; approach has been discussed by Arrow. Majority rule can lead to the tyranny of the majority, depriving the minority of living space and weakening the overall flexibility and adaptability. When the external environment changes, national fortunes decline.\nThe issue of capital determining voice can easily lead to an oligarchic dictatorship, significantly increasing the strategic risks of the entire organization. Relying on individuals\u0026rsquo; enlightenment, without systemic correction mechanisms, a single misstep can result in a total loss.\nSo, is DAO an investment tool?\nBased on some early industry practices, DAO is indeed closer to an investment tool. For example, the well-known ConstitutionDAO aimed to crowdfund the original US Constitution. When people invested money, they formed a DAO in form.\nBut were these investors truly buying the original constitution, waiting for appreciation or future exhibition income, or simply \u0026ldquo;donating\u0026rdquo; to support an interesting endeavor? Or was the auction and the item being auctioned just a starting point, triggering speculation on DAO tokens?\nIn fact, the auction was not successful, and after a voluntary refund, those who did not request a refund held onto the DAO token, PEOPLE, which became highly traded on the market.\nIn a sense, PEOPLE had turned into a meme.\nIn that case, do all those who purchase and hold SHIB (another previously hot meme token) have any expectation of appreciation? Will they still have it after the price drops and the market cools down?\n\u0026ldquo;Free is not really free. All gifts have a hidden price tag. Behind the fair launch, early schemers profit greatly from their early positioning. From the perspective of these schemers, harvesting the \u0026ldquo;leeks\u0026rdquo; (referring to inexperienced investors) is a form of \u0026ldquo;secondary market financing.\u0026rdquo; However, will this financing be used for value creation and production? Probably not. There are no mechanisms to constrain them from doing otherwise. In the end, they will only squander and consume the capital gained from harvesting, serving as the raw material for the next round of manipulation.\nIf DAO evolves towards becoming an investment tool, moving in the direction of companies, it is highly likely to transform into a meme. And meme coins, fundamentally, are tools for consuming value rather than creating value.\nThe phenomenon of memes proves that our human society may have entered an era of excessive capital. It requires rapid liquidation or zeroing out to eliminate the surplus capital held by all the \u0026ldquo;leeks.\u0026rdquo;\nExcessive capital is concentrated. The advent of AI further enhances productivity and capital efficiency, reducing the need for human labor. It\u0026rsquo;s a double-edged sword. On one hand, capitalists have too much money in their hands; on the other hand, capitalists are unwilling to pay wages and employ human labor, leading to massive layoffs, job losses, and unemployment.\nAI is driving us into an era of labor surplus. This surplus may not only be quantitative but also qualitative. Large technology companies lay off a significant number of highly educated employees who then have to seek reemployment in jobs such as truck driving or dishwashing. While the unemployment rate may not be high in statistical terms, labor is being wasted unintentionally.\nDAO should become a new species in the era of labor surplus, a new mode of production. It should gather surplus labor, create new value increments, and distribute them fairly and reasonably.\nDAO should be the \u0026ldquo;lost paradise\u0026rdquo; of free individuals in the post-AI era. DAO is the free association of free individuals.\nThe economic basis of DAO remains surplus value. However, the distribution of surplus value is determined collectively by all those who contribute to it. What participants bring into DAO is merely productivity. Therefore, voting rights, decision-making power, and the right to speak are based on the contributed productivity. Capital can also enter, but capital must first purchase productivity in the market and contribute it to DAO.\nThe decision-making form of DAO should not be based on the \u0026ldquo;one person, one vote\u0026rdquo; principle of national governance or the dominance of equity in corporate governance. It should consider both. For example, a dual-layer voting system can be adopted: in the first layer, the number of supporters among participants needs to exceed two-thirds; in the second layer, the sum of tokens held by supporters should exceed 40%.\nIn this way, it can prevent large holders from unilaterally proposing actions that harm the majority, as well as prevent a group of retail investors from banding together to propose actions that harm large holders.\nApplying the voting paradox described above, although it does not solve the voting paradox and cannot derive deterministic results, it can avoid two situations: assuming token holdings follow a power-law distribution of 1:2:7, where A holds 10%, B holds 20%, and C holds 70%. A and B cannot unite to pass proposal B that is unfavorable to C, and C cannot independently pass proposal C that is most favorable to themselves.\nIf A can strive to set the agenda for voting on proposals A and B, they will get the best result they want. If C can use their influence to set the agenda for voting on proposals A and C, they will get the most favorable result for themselves.\nEither A gets the best or worst outcome, B only gets a mediocre result, and C will always get an upper-moderate result.\nIf B chooses to ally with A, it will allow A to get the best result while getting the worst result for themselves. If B chooses to ally with C, they will get a moderate result while C gets an upper-moderate result.\nIf B and C ally, they will certainly set the agenda for voting on proposals A and C. As a result, they will inevitably obtain outcome C. This outcome is the worst for A, mediocre for B, and the best for C.\nIf the distribution of 1:2:7 represents the distribution of wealth, then the deduction above can be translated as: the rich unite to oppress the middle class and the poor.\nIf the distribution of 1:2:7 represents the contribution of labor, then it can be translated as: contributors ruling over non-contributors.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/Voting_Methods_in_DAOs.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" src=\"https://telegraph-image.pages.dev/file/043ad74d2fe80a746f0c2.png\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDuring the recent six months of practicing DAOs (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations), the basic form of organizational governance, namely voting, has been frequently pondered upon.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Voting Methods in DAOs"},{"content":"\nTencent released its quarterly report yesterday, revealing a year-on-year revenue growth of 10% and a profit increase of 27%. This has sparked various interpretations and discussions in public opinion. Let\u0026rsquo;s not delve into specific details here; those who wish to see positive views can find favorable articles, while those interested in negative perspectives can seek critical analyses. Everyone can find what they prefer.\nHowever, I\u0026rsquo;d like to highlight two main points for everyone\u0026rsquo;s attention.\nFirstly, Tencent is an internet company that relies heavily on its flagship products and traffic. The core of Tencent\u0026rsquo;s business model is as follows: products generate traffic, traffic generates revenue, and revenue leads to profit. Ultimately, assessing Tencent\u0026rsquo;s performance requires evaluating both the quality of its products and the performance of its traffic. WeChat and QQ are Tencent\u0026rsquo;s two major products, while other offerings such as Video Accounts, Mini Programs, and Red Packets and Payments are derivative or subsidiary products stemming from these two main platforms. When examining Tencent\u0026rsquo;s financial reports, it is crucial to consider the performance of its products and traffic records.\nUpon reviewing Tencent\u0026rsquo;s quarterly report, I found that apart from stating the significant growth in user engagement on WeChat, QQ, and Video Accounts, there weren\u0026rsquo;t many supporting data provided. Consequently, I can only say that they performed well, but I cannot offer further analysis.\nSecondly, Tencent\u0026rsquo;s business model, as mentioned earlier, is based on its foundational model of products and traffic generating revenue and profit. However, once Tencent has accumulated income and profit, it engages in new investments. It\u0026rsquo;s similar to a cycle where Tencent earns money, buys shares, receives dividends, and then reinvests. This process continues indefinitely. Therefore, when examining Tencent\u0026rsquo;s financial report, it is essential to pay attention to its investments alongside its products and traffic.\nNow, let\u0026rsquo;s talk about Tencent\u0026rsquo;s investments for the first quarter. The net cash flow from operating activities was ¥62.297 billion, while the net cash flow from investing activities was ¥65.199 billion. In comparison, the corresponding figures for the same period last year were only ¥33.822 billion and ¥20.105 billion, respectively. What does this set of data indicate? It shows that Tencent\u0026rsquo;s cash flow situation significantly improved in the first quarter of this year. They invested externally as much as they earned from their operations, and the net investment amount is more than three times that of the same period last year. In short, Tencent has ample funds and has restarted its investment activities.\nWith solid products and traffic, along with resumed investments after the lifting of restrictions in the gaming sector, Tencent has unlocked all the shackles that had constrained them in recent years. This is the most remarkable aspect of Tencent\u0026rsquo;s quarterly report this year.\nWell, it\u0026rsquo;s absurd to always focus on whether expectations were met or claim there were failures. It\u0026rsquo;s important to address the topic accurately and avoid getting caught up in trivial matters. Let\u0026rsquo;s not lose sight of the bigger picture.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Tech/Good_Job_Tencent.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" src=\"https://telegraph-image.pages.dev/file/79b1db4224de54f73e4a1.jpg\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTencent released its quarterly report yesterday, revealing a year-on-year revenue growth of 10% and a profit increase of 27%. This has sparked various interpretations and discussions in public opinion. Let\u0026rsquo;s not delve into specific details here; those who wish to see positive views can find favorable articles, while those interested in negative perspectives can seek critical analyses. Everyone can find what they prefer.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Good Job, Tencent!"},{"content":"\nOvernight, Bitcoin made a strong leap from the 26.5k level and rebounded to the 27.5k level.\nRecently, some people in the United States are applying double standards to Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s carbon emissions. They claim that Bitcoin mining consumes a certain amount of electricity and results in a corresponding amount of carbon emissions, thus should be subject to a certain emission tax. However, they fail to apply the same standards to Tesla\u0026rsquo;s electric vehicles, which also consume a significant amount of electricity and generate a substantial amount of carbon emissions. Tesla, on the other hand, receives carbon emission credits from the US government every year and sells them to other companies in need, profiting from it.\nBoth Bitcoin mining and Tesla\u0026rsquo;s electric vehicles consume electricity, yet Bitcoin is being taxed while Tesla is being rewarded. If the standard is based on the carbon emissions per kilowatt-hour of electricity consumed, then both should be taxed. If the standard is based on a reference value, such as carbon emissions from burning coal or oil, and the actual electricity consumption is from cleaner energy sources, then the same rewards should be given based on the emission reduction. This blatant double standard of punishment and reward is evident.\nThis issue of carbon emissions and double standards is not new. In a 2010 interview by Chai Jing with Academician Ding Zhongli and Professor Qian Weihong from Peking University, Ding questioned the Western viewpoint of setting emission limits based on countries rather than population, asking, \u0026ldquo;Are Chinese people not human? Why should the same Chinese person emit less?\u0026rdquo;\nThese two cases of double standards may seem different, but they are based on the same underlying logic: using value judgments as a fig leaf for double standards.\nIn the case of Bitcoin and Tesla, the illogical argument is that Tesla\u0026rsquo;s new energy vehicles represent the future and have great value, while Bitcoin has no value. Therefore, Tesla\u0026rsquo;s electricity consumption should be rewarded, and Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s electricity consumption should be punished.\nIn the case of Chinese and American people, it\u0026rsquo;s the same flawed logic: how high is the value created by each American? Chinese people engage in labor-intensive work, so their value is considered low. Therefore, a Chinese person is deemed unworthy of enjoying the same carbon emission credits as an American.\nThis logic has caused countless human tragedies throughout history. Eugenics is a product of this logic: able-bodied individuals are considered valuable for their labor, while those who are sick, elderly, or disabled and unable to work are deemed low in value. Thus, forced elimination is advocated for low-value individuals. Racial discrimination is also a product of this logic: white people are considered high in value, while black people are considered low in value. Therefore, white people should be masters, and black people should be slaves. Hitler\u0026rsquo;s fascism is likewise a product of this logic: the noble Aryan race is deemed high in value, while the inferior Jewish people are considered low in value. Thus, genocide is advocated against the latter.\nThe philosophical basis of this logic is closely related to Jeremy Bentham\u0026rsquo;s utilitarianism. Utilitarianism aims to maximize overall value. However, is there really a unified standard for value? Can value be objectively judged? And is there truly such a thing as \u0026ldquo;overall value\u0026rdquo;?\nA classic criticism of utilitarianism poses a thought experiment: You, healthy and well, happen to pass by a hospital where five people lie, each with a damaged organ (liver, heart, spleen, lung, kidney) urgently needing replacement. The doctor says that sacrificing you would save the lives of these five people. Moreover, the work positions of these five people are more important and have higher value than yours, and sacrificing yourself would undoubtedly increase the overall value of society and make society better as a whole! Would you be willing?\nValue itself is inherently diverse. Something that one person treasures might be considered worthless by another person. What you perceive as having no value, I might consider as valuable as the sky. If you don\u0026rsquo;t like something, you simply don\u0026rsquo;t engage with it. But if you refuse to engage with it yourself and also prevent others from doing so, that is sliding towards fascism.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/Do_not_apply_double_standards_when_it_comes_to_carbon_emissions.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" src=\"https://telegraph-image.pages.dev/file/e5da4dcdd5f631218f6a3.jpg\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOvernight, Bitcoin made a strong leap from the 26.5k level and rebounded to the 27.5k level.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRecently, some people in the United States are applying double standards to Bitcoin\u0026rsquo;s carbon emissions. They claim that Bitcoin mining consumes a certain amount of electricity and results in a corresponding amount of carbon emissions, thus should be subject to a certain emission tax. However, they fail to apply the same standards to Tesla\u0026rsquo;s electric vehicles, which also consume a significant amount of electricity and generate a substantial amount of carbon emissions. Tesla, on the other hand, receives carbon emission credits from the US government every year and sells them to other companies in need, profiting from it.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Do not apply double standards when it comes to carbon emissions"},{"content":"On the early morning of the 4th, the Federal Reserve concluded its May interest rate meeting. As expected, there was another 25 basis points rate hike, bringing the federal funds rate to the range of 5% to 5.25%. The plan to reduce the balance sheet through bond selling continues, but the wording suggesting further rate hikes has been removed. This is likely to be the last rate hike. Bitcoin experienced a drop followed by a rise, surging from around $28.5k to $29k.\nDue to the previous emergency assistance provided to banks, the Federal Reserve\u0026rsquo;s six-month effort to reduce its balance sheet was undone. The balance sheet regressed by almost half within a couple of weeks. It\u0026rsquo;s like scooping out two spoonfuls of water while pouring a basin of water back in. This makes the act of scooping out two spoonfuls appear ridiculous, as if it has become a form of performance art.\nPowell lifted the stone, but he doesn\u0026rsquo;t know whose foot to hit.\nIn 2020, when Powell aggressively expanded the balance sheet and injected liquidity, we were implementing a reverse taper. In early 2022, before Powell initiated the tapering and bond selling, we preemptively sold off US Treasury bonds and accumulated US dollars. In 2023, when the countries unable to obtain strengthened currency swaps from the Federal Reserve found themselves on the brink of crisis due to the circulation of the US dollar, they came to us seeking assistance. We extended the umbrella of US dollar reserves to shield them from the storm.\nThe US dollar belongs to the US, and China provides the umbrella. Under this umbrella lies the \u0026ldquo;internal\u0026rdquo; circulation of the Chinese yuan. Those who join this \u0026ldquo;internal\u0026rdquo; circulation system avoid being harmed by the thunder (Powell) and the storm (Yellen) caused by the US dollar.\nThis scene is reminiscent of a game in which an eagle catches chicks in a kindergarten. Previously, when the eagle was hungry, it would catch two chicks to eat. Now, the flock of chickens has a mother hen who shields the chicks from the eagle\u0026rsquo;s predation with her broad wings. The hungry eagle jumps left and right, trying both gentle and forceful approaches, but it cannot break through the mother hen\u0026rsquo;s protective line and cannot catch the chicks to have a hearty meal.\nIncidentally, China\u0026rsquo;s actions have inadvertently helped Bitcoin complete a round of countercyclical adjustments. In early 2021, when the bull market was overheating, we cracked down on mining, preventing this round of bull market from spiraling into madness and avoiding asset over-bubbling, as well as preventing more funds from entering at higher levels. By early 2023, during the strict regulation of the US, we quietly relaxed the narrative around Hong Kong, igniting a rebound in Bitcoin from its bottom, doubling in value in just three to four months. This combination of a crackdown and a rally hit the mark: a crackdown during the Fed\u0026rsquo;s expansionary monetary policy and a rally when the Fed was tightening. The difference between the high and low was only $30,000 and $60,000, successfully smoothing out the cycle, moving in the opposite direction of the Federal Reserve, and weakening the US dollar\u0026rsquo;s harvesting power over Bitcoin investors. In reverse, it also means striking at the US dollar\u0026rsquo;s objective of regaining strength by harvesting external economies.\nBitcoin is like water. It reflects not only the bubble and de-bubbling of the US dollar cycle but also the countercyclical adjustment of the Chinese yuan. It is selfless and actionless, hence it can \u0026ldquo;follow others while remaining ahead,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;exist externally while surviving internally,\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;act without acting.\u0026rdquo;\nThere are ambushes in the front and pursuers in the rear. The pursuers behind Powell are the menacing inflation. He has the intention to defeat the enemy but lacks the power to turn the tide. The US bond market is on the verge of being unable to withstand further selling. If everyone is selling, who will step in to buy? Without buyers, won\u0026rsquo;t it lead to a collapse?\nTherefore, the leaders of the United States chose to collude with financial capital, tearing off the hypocritical mask of the \u0026ldquo;spirit of the contract,\u0026rdquo; revealing a fierce and grim face with gleaming fangs. They continue to raise interest rates. This causes small and medium-sized banks holding large amounts of US bonds to be unable to cover their debts, allows interbank market rates to soar, sucking the blood out of small and medium-sized banks, accelerating their collapse, and making the investors and creditors of these banks bear the cost of their personal assets going to zero overnight. Meanwhile, Powell\u0026rsquo;s big banker friends quickly devour these fallen, nearly dying, and fat lambs at a bargain price.\nWhen pirates fail to plunder externally, they start to fight internally. The most brutal infighting is disguised as nothing. The victims silently fall and are quickly devoured. Everyone talks about the weather today with a smiling face, as if nothing has happened.\nPowell\u0026rsquo;s stone has ultimately landed on the feet of the American people.\nWhen the elder brother becomes ruthless. If he\u0026rsquo;s not ruthless, how can he be the elder brother? When the elder brother becomes ruthless, he can carve his own flesh to feed himself. This has happened in history before. In 1933, President Roosevelt forced Americans to surrender their gold through fines and imprisonment by issuing Executive Order 6102. Now, 90 years later, President Biden is going to make the American people bear some cost. The difference is that Roosevelt plundered the American people to make America great again, while President Biden is plundering the American people to make the vested interests of the financial group even stronger.\nFormer President Clinton once said that the power of the Federal Reserve Chairperson is greater than that of the President of the United States.\nThis time, when Powell lifts the stone and injures the feet of the American people, when the Federal Reserve\u0026rsquo;s balance sheet reduction has become a form of performance art, when interest rate hikes are nearing their end, when the Chinese yuan seeps into the vacuum zone caused by the US dollar\u0026rsquo;s withdrawal, and when Bitcoin has returned to the $30,000 level, the Federal Reserve has already declared the failure of this cycle of the US dollar harvesting the world.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/World/The_Federal_Reserves_Defeat_A_Turning_Point_in_Monetary_Policy.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eOn the early morning of the 4th, the Federal Reserve concluded its May interest rate meeting. As expected, there was another 25 basis points rate hike, bringing the federal funds rate to the range of 5% to 5.25%. The plan to reduce the balance sheet through bond selling continues, but the wording suggesting further rate hikes has been removed. This is likely to be the last rate hike. Bitcoin experienced a drop followed by a rise, surging from around $28.5k to $29k.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"The Federal Reserve's Defeat, A Turning Point in Monetary Policy"},{"content":"Device shots is an online tool for making screenshots with shells. You just need to drag the screenshots onto the web page. It supports multi brand mobile phones, tablets, computers, TVs, monitors, smart watches and other devices.\nScreenshots with shells can make them look more specific, but in fact, they are mainly more beautiful.\nIt\u0026rsquo;s easy to use with a lot of screenshots on the phone. The feature of device shots is that it supports many devices, including mobile phones, computers, tablets, smart watches, TVs and other devices.\nIncluding but not limited to the following equipments:\nApple iPhone series Pixel series Samsung series IPad series Surface series MacBook series IMac series XPS series Apple watch series Sony SmartWatch 3 Apple Pro XDR display Dell ultrasharp display Samsung Frame Sony W850C It is easy to use the tool.\nFirst select the device type, then select the specific device, and then drag the screenshot in.\nDevice shots are also built-in to accommodate many social platform sizes, such as Facebook, twitter, instagram, pinterest, dribble, snapchat, Google play, etc.\nFinally, adjust the background color and transparency.\nThe link is below: https://deviceshots.com/?ref=nickyam\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Tech/Device-shots.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eDevice shots is an online tool for making screenshots with shells. You just need to drag the screenshots onto the web page. It supports multi brand mobile phones, tablets, computers, TVs, monitors, smart watches and other devices.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eScreenshots with shells can make them look more specific, but in fact, they are mainly more beautiful.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Device shots – making shell screenshots online, supporting multi brand mobile phones, tablets, computers, TVs, monitors, smart watches"},{"content":"Ma Yun Foundation invited many clinicians who participate in the treatment of new coronavirus and spent a week writing a Handbook of COVID-19 Prevention and Treatment for hospitals, doctors and nurses.\nMost of the hospitals in the world are facing challenges. We especially hope to share these practical experiences with hospitals and medical staff around the world ASAP. So please download, print, or forward them to your nearby hospitals and medical staff so that they can be ready.\nThank you!\nHandbook of COVID-19 Prevention and Treatment: https://covid-19.alibabacloud.com/zh\nHandbook Chinese version: https://www.alibabacloud.com/zh/universal-service/pdf_reader?pdf=Handbook_of_COVID_19_Prevention_zh_Moblie.pdf\nHandbook English version: https://www.alibabacloud.com/zh/universal-service/pdf_reader?pdf=Handbook_of_COVID_19_Prevention_en_Mobile.pdf\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/World/Handbook-of-COVID-19-Prevention-and-Treatment.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eMa Yun Foundation invited many clinicians who participate in the treatment of new coronavirus and spent a week writing a \u003cstrong\u003eHandbook of COVID-19 Prevention and Treatment\u003c/strong\u003e for hospitals, doctors and nurses.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMost of the hospitals in the world are facing challenges. We especially hope to share these practical experiences with hospitals and medical staff around the world ASAP. So please download, print, or forward them to your nearby hospitals and medical staff so that they can be ready.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Handbook of COVID-19 Prevention and Treatment"},{"content":" Will open windows increase the chance of infection?\nActually, good vatilation helps to reduce the amount of viruses that may exist in doors and helps to renew the indoor air. ‘Diluted’ outdoor air is almost impossible to bring viruses indoors.\nIf your family members are suspected acute respiratory infection patients, open the window but keep the door closed during ventilation. Do not use central ventilation system to avoid the air in the sick people’s room entering the clean areas.\nUnder what conditions home is isolation is necessary?\nFor the moment, there are 3 types of people who need home isolation.\nSuspected COVID-19 patients with mild symptoms\nPeople who are diagnosed by doctors as suspected COVID-19 with mild symptoms and recommended clearly to have home observation.\nClose contact ( Close contacts are those who have been in close contact with a person known to have COVID-19 or a highly suspected case. )\nA close contact is any of the following conditions and may need home isolation. Please see a doctor or contact local health department ASAP if you are:\nLiving, studying or working with confirmed patients or having any other forms of close contact; Having treated, nursed or visited confirmed patients without effective protective measures; Having been in hospitalized in the same room with confirmed patients. Having been using the same means of transportation and had close contact with the confirmed patients. People who are considered necessary to be isolated by the local health department.\nIf you have a fever ( body temperature above 100.5 F ) with any of the following conditions, please go to the hospital ASAP; Shortness of breath, obvious chest tightness and asthma; Have been in close contact with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia patients; Patients with pre-existing heart, brain, liver, and kidney disease such as high blood pressure, heart problems, etc.. ","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/World/How-to-prevent-the-spread-of-COVID-19-when-staying-home.html","summary":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWill open windows increase the chance of infection?\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eActually, good vatilation helps to reduce the amount of viruses that may exist in doors and helps to renew the indoor air. ‘Diluted’ outdoor air is almost impossible to bring viruses indoors.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIf your family members are suspected acute respiratory infection patients, open the window but keep the door closed during ventilation. Do not use central ventilation system to avoid the air in the sick people’s room entering the clean areas.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e","title":"How to prevent the spread of COVID-19 when staying home"},{"content":"\nPrecautions in pregnancy check-ups During the epidemic, pregnant moms need to note the following things when going for pregnancy check-ups:\nAvoid taking public transport. You can take taxi, uber and your private car.\nAvoid staying in hospital for a long time. You can ask your family to line up for you and find a ventilated place with fewer people while waiting. Don’t wait in doors for long.\nAlways wear an N95 mask or medical mask from home to hospital. Gloves are also recommended.\nBring hand sanitizer or sanitizing wipes with you all the time to maintain hand hygiene when it is not convenient for you to wash your hands.\nAvoid touching your eyes, mouth or nose with your hands. The virus can transmit through contact.\nDispose of used masks in a proper way upon getting home. Remember to change your clothes, wash your hands and face in time.\nKeep distance from others (at least one meter away) when you are on the way or in hospital.\nCan new moms keep breastfeeding during the epidemic? If you are healthy and want to breastfeed your baby, please remember to wash your hands regularly. Pay attention to the hygiene of those body parts where you will have close contact with your baby.\nFollow the guidelines of home isolation. Wear a medical mask and carefully wash your hands before intimate contact with your baby. Keep your wrists, arms and outerwear clean.\nBreastfeeding is not recommended under these circumstances.\nYou are a suspected COVID-19 patient. You are a confirmed COVID-19 patient and not yet fully recovered from the disease. **SPECIAL NOTICE: **If you are taking certain antivirus drugs, such as Lopinavir or Ritonavir, you are not recommended to breastfeed your child.\nIf you have respiratory symptoms but not COVID-19 infected, you can breastfeed your baby under the guidance of a doctor.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/World/Recommendations-for-pregnant-women.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" src=\"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/nickyam/img/master/pics/Pregnant-woman.jpeg\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePrecautions in pregnancy check-ups\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDuring the epidemic, pregnant moms need to note the following things when going for pregnancy check-ups:\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Recommendations for pregnant women"},{"content":" how to protect your children when going out Don’t go out if possible, that is the best way to protect your children.\nIf have to, drive private car or take a taxi, and use public transportation less frequently such as buses and subways where people are crowed. Walking is the best way for nearby destinations. Both parents and children should wear masks and ensure timely replacement, and do not touch the outside surface of masks, so as to avoid the virus transferring to the hands. Carry instant sanitizer and other disinfectant products with you, disinfect your children’s hands in time if they touch other things, and try to keep children from sucking their fingers, rubbing their eyes and noses before disinfection. Wash your hands in the right way once you get home, change your and your children’s outerwear in case of virus spread during contact. Children’s food during the epidemic Make sure the food is thoroughly cooked, especially meat and eggs. Raw and cooked food should be handled by using two different cutting boards and different sets of kitchen tools and put in separate bowls; Wash hands when you switch between handling raw and cooked food; After your hands before touching your children. In addition, since COVID-19 can be transmitted through saliva, it is imperative to keep your child from eating food that has been tasted by others and not to cool your children’s food by blowing. These actions could spread the virus to children without notice. It is advised to use separate dishes and serving utensils, which can help to avoid cross-contamination. So, can you feed your children with chicken, duck and fish? Yes, but make sure it is cooked. Until now, there is no evidence showing that COVID-19 can be transmitted via regular meat and seafood. But be aware that both meat and eggs must be fully cooked before eating. Meanwhile be careful not to buy poultry or seafood from unknown source. Don’t touch live birds without protect. ","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/World/How-to-care-for-children-during-the-epidemic.html","summary":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ehow to protect your children when going out\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDon’t go out if possible, that is the best way to protect your children.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"How to care for children during the epidemic ?"},{"content":"At 9 o\u0026rsquo;clock last night, my right eye burst into tears when I was on the Internet, and then my eyelids could not be opened. This is an eye disease I have never experienced in my life; of course, except for myopia. After ten minutes of rest, I still felt not well. I finally standed my eyelids to write a diary half-blindly, and hoped that when I fell asleep, I could heal myself.\nI woke up early today and found that my symptoms did not ease. In the mirror, I found that there are some red filaments in the right eye. Just like the suspected conjunctivitis which is also known as \u0026ldquo;red eye disease\u0026rdquo;, but the symptoms of conjunctivitis are not obvious. As a person with a good attendance record, I went for work as usual. Before I start my work, I did the following things:\nDimmed the computer screen brightness and adjusted the warm tone to make the light softer.\nDrinking two bags of Qingkailing granules, clearing heat and reducing fire.\nWipe the eyes with a paper towel to prevent tears from infecting the left eye.\nTake a full two-hour lunch break at noon.\nIn the afternoon, although the red silk still exists and the right eye still has a certain bad feeling, but the symptoms gradually eased.\nLooking back on this incident, I think that the unknown vomit on the bus last night could be the reason that my eye was infected or allergic to the bacteria and viruses in it.\nIf you encounter a similar situation in the future, you must get out of the bus immediately to avoid it, especially if the new coronavirus has recently spread.\nSecondly, from my previous experience, I believe more in my ability to heal my self. Conjunctivitis usually heals itself in about 7 days (although I can\u0026rsquo;t determine if I am bearing a conjunctivitis). But when it comes to health issues, maintaining a good attitude is important.\nThird, tears are good things, they can be sterilized. If I didn\u0026rsquo;t have a lot of tears on my eyes this time, I might need to buy eye drops. Although I haven\u0026rsquo;t used eye drops for more than 10 years. This also proves that my eyes have been healthy for a long time.\nFinally, after this incident, I realized that eyes are really important. Try not to stay up late and not overuse them.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/World/A-sudden-eye-disease.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eAt 9 o\u0026rsquo;clock last night, my right eye burst into tears when I was on the Internet, and then my eyelids could not be opened. This is an eye disease I have never experienced in my life; of course, except for myopia. After ten minutes of rest, I still felt not well. I finally standed my eyelids to write a diary half-blindly, and hoped that when I fell asleep, I could heal myself.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eI woke up early today and found that my symptoms did not ease. In the mirror, I found that there are some red filaments in the right eye. Just like the suspected conjunctivitis which is also known as \u0026ldquo;red eye disease\u0026rdquo;, but the symptoms of conjunctivitis are not obvious. As a person with a good attendance record, I went for work as usual. Before I start my work, I did the following things:\u003c/p\u003e","title":"A sudden eye disease"},{"content":"Before going out this morning, I downloaded the new macOS Catalina beta system and let it update itself. When I came back in the afternoon, I found that the system update failed, indicating that the storage space was insufficient. I encountered this situation in the past, I restarted the computer and entered the old system, and then re-updated after setting some space free.\nHowever this time things are different. On the one hand, I still have 20GB of free hard disk space before the update. According to common sense, I should not be prompted for insufficient space. On the other hand, I could not enter the old system after the update fails. I updated the system in an infinite loop, and the update fails.\nHow to solve this problem and enter the old system?\nThe first step, I passed the option guidance system selection, tried to enter the old systems. But halfway through the progress bar, the screen flickered and the screen went black. Suspected hardware problems.\nIn the second step, I am going to check if there is any problem with the hardware. Because my computer installed Boot Camp, so I passed option into the Windows 10 system selection, everything is normal. In this system, I set up 35GB of space, and the remaining space is 4.65GB. Therefore, it can be determined that the hardware is basically normal.\nThe third step is also a more critical step. I entered the recovery system via command + r. Because of my lack of space has been identified as the primary partition, so I chose the utility disk tool, erased Boot Campdisk and merged it into the primary partition. In this way, I have more than 50GB of free disk space, which is enough to update.\nMy only worry is that after reinstalling macOS in the recovery system interface, my personal data may be completely erased. Fortunately, after nearly an hour of updating and waiting, I entered the familiar interface and new operating system.\nIn this way, I solved the problem mentioned in the title, but sacrificed a system that is not commonly used. It\u0026rsquo;s a pity, but it\u0026rsquo;s a blessing in misfortune.\nRecord it for your reference.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Tech/The-resolution-of-macOS-beta-update-prompts-insufficient-space-infinite-loop-restart.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eBefore going out this morning, I downloaded the new macOS Catalina beta system and let it update itself. When I came back in the afternoon, I found that the system update failed, indicating that the storage space was insufficient. I encountered this situation in the past, I restarted the computer and entered the old system, and then re-updated after setting some space free.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHowever this time things are different. On the one hand, I still have 20GB of free hard disk space before the update. According to common sense, I should not be prompted for insufficient space. On the other hand, I could not enter the old system after the update fails. I updated the system in an infinite loop, and the update fails.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"The resolution of macOS beta update prompts insufficient space, infinite loop restart"},{"content":"This evening, I received a special email from the mailbox that I haven\u0026rsquo;t used for a long time, a bitcoin blackmail. The email showed me the password that I have always been familiar with. Next, the mail told me that someone had captured my camera at the same time and took my private video. I was required to pay $ 999 in the form of Bitcoin. First of all, I am convinced that I have no private photos or videos; secondly, I will not accept extortion by the other party; finally, my password was changed a long time ago, so this should be from some password database when it leaked which i was involved\nSo, although this email was long, the core is just a leaked password i have already changed. Anything else that breaking into my camera, and the need to transfer bitcoins just made this email look even worse. If you come across this kind of email, keep calm first, and then search for similar cases on the Internet, you can see my article, and don’t worry about it. Of course, I also checked other websites and found that there are several similar reports , and you can also refer to them.\nlike this:A second Bitcoin blackmail scam, based on hacked passwords\nThe full text of my email is as follows:\nI am aware xxxxxxx is your pass. Lets get straight to purpose. Not one person has compensated me to investigate you. You don’t know me and you are most likely wondering why you’re getting this e mail?\nWell, i setup a malware on the X video clips (adult porn) web-site and you know what, you visited this web site to experience fun (you know what i mean). While you were watching videos, your web browser initiated functioning as a Remote Desktop having a key logger which provided me with accessibility to your display and also webcam. Just after that, my software program collected all of your contacts from your Messenger, FB, as well as email . and then i made a double-screen video. First part displays the video you were watching (you have a good taste ; )), and next part displays the recording of your webcam, yeah it is you.\nYou get two possibilities. Lets check out each of these choices in particulars:\nFirst alternative is to neglect this e-mail. as a result, i will send your actual recorded material to every bit of your contacts and thus visualize about the shame you feel. Furthermore in case you are in a committed relationship, exactly how it will eventually affect?\nLatter option is to pay me USD 999. We are going to think of it as a donation. Consequently, i will quickly discard your video recording. You can carry on your daily life like this never occurred and you would never hear back again from me.\nYou’ll make the payment via Bi‌tco‌in (if you don’t know this, search for ‘how to buy b‌itcoi‌n’ in Google).\nB‌T‌C‌ ad‌dre‌ss: 12Q7NUp4Ex7F6PnnGf2jQDB5MfmguCBTzv\n[case SeNSiTiVe copy and paste it]\nif you have been curious about going to the cops, very well, this e-mail cannot be traced back to me. I have covered my moves. i am not trying to charge a fee a whole lot, i wish to be rewarded. You have%} one day tuCBTzv if i do not get the ‌bi‌tco‌in‌, i will definitely send out your video to all of your contacts including membe rs of your family, colleagues, and many others. Nonetheless, if i receive the payment, i will destroy the recording immediately. If you want evidence, reply Yup! \u0026amp; i definitely will send out your video to your 12 friends. This is the nonnegotiable offer that being said don’t waste my time and yours by responding to this e-mail.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/I-received-a-Bitcoin-Blackmail.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eThis evening, I received a special email from the mailbox that I haven\u0026rsquo;t used for a long time, a bitcoin blackmail. The email showed me the password that I have always been familiar with. Next, the mail told me that someone had captured my camera at the same time and took my private video. I was required to pay $ 999 in the form of Bitcoin. First of all, I am convinced that I have no private photos or videos; secondly, I will not accept extortion by the other party; finally, my password was changed a long time ago, so this should be from some password database when it leaked which i was involved\u003c/p\u003e","title":"I received a Bitcoin Blackmail"},{"content":"In the last day of the year, while writing a summary of the year and update new year plan,I am thinking of the time.\nAs you get older, the proportion of your life in a lifetime is getting lower and lower, and the year is getting shorter and shorter for you. In fact, it is not that the earth is getting faster and faster, the change is the sensibility that you look at the surroundings and people,and touch the world.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/World/The-end-of-2018.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eIn the last day of the year, while writing a summary of the year and update new year plan,I am thinking of the time.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs you get older, the proportion of your life in a lifetime is getting lower and lower, and the year is getting shorter and shorter for you. In fact, it is not that the earth is getting faster and faster, the change is the sensibility that you look at the surroundings and people,and touch the world.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"The end of 2018"},{"content":"If anyone asks what the greatest human invention in the second half of the twentieth century is, it is definitely the Internet. Through the virtual information network, the planet has truly become an interconnected village. People of different races, different skin colours, and different faiths can instantly speak and exchange information on the Internet. But have you discovered that in recent years, the Internet has been filled with a lot of vulgar, violent, and boring information, they have begun to become the mainstream of the mass Internet. Some people have predicted that the next century, the world will enter the second Middle Ages. Why does this take place now?Let us review the two stages of Internet first :\nIn the first two decades of the Internet development, that is, in the PC era, people who have access to the Internet are generally highly educated and are in the elites of society, especially those represented by programmers who use the Internet as a variety of experimental fields. Therefore, the Internet world at that time was relatively pure, and more embodied in instrumentality and experimentation. The Internet, like telegraph and telephone, has significantly promoted the productivity and evolution of human society. People who have no access to the Internet look forward to the magical Internet life as they yearn for heaven. This is the very first stage.\nSince Steve Jobs defined the smartphone, the Internet has entered the civilian era, and the number of Internet users worldwide has expanded rapidly. The voices of the first generation of aborigines represented by programmers were drowned in the ocean of the common people. The Internet is no longer a pure paradise, but a black and white place that completely inherits the real world. Except for a small group of people who work for work or for self-realisation, most people work for a better life. In the way of life, there is no obvious difference between modern people and primitive people. In addition to the reproduction, life is flooded of singing and dancing. The only difference is the place of the event from the original jungle to the virtual space. The Internet has entered an era of entertainment.\nIn the process of entertainment, we find that the irrational voice on the Internet often overshadows the appeal of reason; the spread of vicious events is often easier to search than the good ones; gossip news is far more heated than academic discussion. Abandoning the judgment of good and evil, I classify information into positive information, neutral information, and negative information. It stands to reason that in the statistical sense, the world is finally regression, and there can be no significant deviation. So what is the cause of the negative shift in information? This is determined by the following two characteristics of negative information.\nThe first is the efficiency of transmission. Let’s make a small analogy. Originally in real society, such as in a community, the efficiency of negative information dissemination is higher than positive information. We can imagine that the thief incident in the neighbours must be faster and wider than the companion of the neighbours. This is driven by human curiosity, gloating, and jealous. The wide-ranging circulation of information has little difference in the spread efficiency of the three types of information in the era of no Internet because of geographical barriers and time delay, and has not reached its own speed limit. Through the catalysis of the Internet, we can think that the spread of these three kinds of information has reached the limit of their own “community spread” infinitely, so there is a phenomenon that negative information drives out positive information. Negative information is more efficient than the other two types. This discussion is based on propagation under a single source of information.\nThe second is the cost of copying. In addition to the high efficiency of negative information, the cost of copying is extremely low. As the same example of the neighbours above, the thief of the neighbour’s house was not caught, and it would be easy for people to imitate it. However, it is costly to learn from the children of neighbours and finally win the prize. It is not cost-effective. Therefore, the imitation and replication efficiency of negative information may be viral in the general public. Coupled with the herding effect, the mentality of the masses has been negatively biased. This is extremely harmful to the sustainable development of a society. Why the DIDI drivers raped female passengers happens frequently, because people with such a tendency can gather together through the network, teaching each other, discussing their experiences, and this motivation is far greater than academic discussion on the Internet. This discussion illustrates that negative sources of information can mimic fission during the course of transmission.\nHow to effectively overcome this problem is an urgent one to be solved? If he is a legal expert, he will think that it is necessary to strengthen the rule of law on the Internet; if he is a technology expert, he will consider how to screen and block negative information; if he is a politician, he may use all the information that is beneficial to himself, whether positive or Negative. Ass determines the head, since you stand in your own perspective, you will propose or use different rules. And I only talk about general methodology, that is reducing the efficiency of the transmission of negative information and increasing the cost of copying.\nPropagation is a node. This one-to-one transit node is a personal individual. Improving the quality of citizens, although impossible to completely blocking or cutting off the negative information dissemination chain, can greatly reduce the speed of communication. If the propagation speed is controlled within a certain range, the negative information will decay rapidly in a small range over time. The second is to increase non-negative information in the unit area by diluting the negative information density. Because the information transmission in a certain area is a three-dimensional network, if the information transmission path is occupied by non-negative information for a long time, the propagation time of the negative information will be reduced accordingly, and it can play the same role, just like The ball control of both sides in the football match. Here is just an example. Following this line, you can think of many methods. For example, adopting mandatory legal measures for malicious information, such as strengthening the credit information system, and so on. Of course, not everyone is a bad person. Some people just vent their emotions on the Internet that they can’t vent in reality. This is also an environmental pollution to the Internet. Therefore, by levying a speech pollution tax, people can pay for it online. This can be easily done in the era of artificial intelligence.\nThis article is not intended to suggest a systematic solution.,since I am not an expert in this field. I just want to call on the Internet to face up to the negative evolution of Internet information in a timely manner. Don’t let the Internet society falling into an irrational atmosphere for a long time, and finally affecting the sustainable development of the real society.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/World/The_negative_evolution_of_information_on_Internet.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eIf anyone asks what the greatest human invention in the second half of the twentieth century is, it is definitely the Internet. Through the virtual information network, the planet has truly become an interconnected village. People of different races, different skin colours, and different faiths can instantly speak and exchange information on the Internet. But have you discovered that in recent years, the Internet has been filled with a lot of vulgar, violent, and boring information, they have begun to become the mainstream of the mass Internet. Some people have predicted that the next century, the world will enter the second Middle Ages. Why does this take place now?Let us review the two stages of Internet first :\u003c/p\u003e","title":"The negative evolution of information on Internet"},{"content":"I recently have been thinking of the value of Bitcoin and wanted to know the logic about BTC. As we all know, BTC is a virtual currency based on deflation logic. Due to the deflation property of its design, the greater the degree of attention, the more users, the higher price. What I came to understand recently is some controversial parts:\ni.The virtual currency of deflation logic itself does not have an absolute threshold. A dog with a certain programming base can design similar products such as fire coins, water coins, etc. But under normal circumstances only one concept is the most recognised. This is similar to brand barriers. It is clear that Bitcoin currently has this capability. Just like that in ancient Africa, maybe coconut is hard currency, but when trading with westerners, hard currency can only be silver or gold coins.\nii.Bitcoin is basically unable to be physically blocked by the government unless the Internet is banned. Of course, there is still a big risk in Bitcoin. That is, governments forming a legal cognition alliance, and announcing that the circulation of Bitcoin is illegal. Since it can be circulated through the Internet, users can also be locked and located through the Internet. For instance, Pony Ma can’t stop Jack Ma from sending a WeChat red envelope to Liu Qiangdong, but he can know whether Liu Qiangdong received the red envelope.\niii. The value of Bitcoin lies in its trading tax avoidance property. But this is similar to investing in gold. The consumptional and functional application properties of gold are very low, mainly due to currency attributes. The demand side is difficult to estimate and can only be judged by the political and economic forms of international powers. Given its strong destructiveness in subverting government currency, valuations are even harder.\nAs an investment variety, the risk is indeed too large, mainly because the price does not have a stable valuation framework. Of course, I still don’t understand much about BTC. Record it first.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/Some_Points_about_the_Value_of_BTC.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eI recently have been thinking of the value of Bitcoin and wanted to know the logic about BTC. As we all know, BTC is a virtual currency based on deflation logic. Due to the deflation property of its design, the greater the degree of attention, the more users, the higher price. What I came to understand recently is some controversial parts:\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Some Points about the Value of BTC"},{"content":"In Year 2011, I first heard about BTC. At that moment, I thought BTC as something geek and would never be a true currency. As a curious person, I dug some coins by my SAMSUNG laptop and after a period of time just forgot BTC until I heard it again in Mid-2013 when the price rushed up to $1000 per coin. I thought BTC is a shell game then and never predicted that tons of Digital Coins would appear since then.\nWithout doubt, Chinese Internet Giants won’t miss the bus while other fields are already full of competitors. The Passage is not aimed to talk about BTC or other digital coins, just introduce some interesting so-called blockchain apps made by Netease and Baidu. A lot of people who regret over and over again that they didn’t catch up the chance to be rich overnight by BTC, rush into the APPs to make money in the blockchain games. The games show that blockchains has value in being used outside of simple currency trading. A token is issued to the user and this token gives the user full ownership over the object.\nIn Feb 5th, 2018, Baidu released Laici Dog which just pronounced as “Let’s go” in Chinese. After registration, the user can adopt a low grade dog for free. You can sell it for Laicicoins and buy another lovely dog who has been labelled such as epic\\myth\\excellence and identified a lucky number just as you operate in the stock market. You also can have your dogs breed. The game does not feature cash transactions. Netease has another game Zhaoai Cat, even released earlier than Laici Dog. Zhaocai Cat in Chinese cultural means that the cat will make fortunes come to you itself. Xiaomi has also released a game called Jiami rabbit, meaning “crypto rabbit”.\nAs we all know, Netease is a respectful company in Hangzhou China, where another Giant Alibaba is also located. As a traditional Game Corp, Netease decided to focus on a blockchain called planet after Zhaocai Cat was shut down. The planet is a platform where you can obtain Force by logging in, reading news , enjoying music, shopping on the app. Then The Force will auto run by itself and dig out BlackDiamond(ab.BD) which is similar to BTC. The Planet organizes activities on a regular basis to exchange BD to offline gifts or online benefits, someone even get pork which is made by Netease itself. The APP is a combination of Netease services and I think it’s a success.\nThen Baidu soon Copied another APP called Du Yuzhou, meaning that Baidu Cosmos. Compared to the name planet, Baidu has greater ambitions than Netease. It calls the Netease force as Gravitation and the Netease BD as Element. However Baidu didn’t copy the way of playing, and introduced Q\u0026amp;A competition about love\\sport\\culture, etc. Until now, I haven’t found out the function of Elements.\nThe Games educates us about the blockchain. For me, I will play the Planet for a long time, but won’t have a long interest in The Baidu Cosmos. What about YOU? I hope more that the companies find more ways to use the tech for our life, not just the Games.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Crypto/Blockchain_Games_in_China.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eIn Year 2011, I first heard about BTC. At that moment, I thought BTC as something geek and would never be a true currency. As a curious person, I dug some coins by my SAMSUNG laptop and after a period of time just forgot BTC until I heard it again in Mid-2013 when the price rushed up to $1000 per coin. I thought BTC is a shell game then and never predicted that tons of Digital Coins would appear since then.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Blockchain Games in China"},{"content":"\nIf you see Happy Death Day as a horror movie, you may be disappointed; but if you treat it as a chick film, this is definitely a wonderful piece that combines elements of horror, suspense, and hilarity, and will give you many surprises.\nA few months ago, the trailer for Happy Death Day was on fire on Chinese Weibo, and I was looking forward to it. Before I walked into the cinema, I was somewhat suspicious: the trailer seemed to have spoiled it. What else could I get for the entire movie?Fortunately, it turns out that Happy Death Day is not disappointing. There are no lack of funny words in the lines. The audience laughs and the rhythm is not sloppy. There are almost no deliberately stupid characters in the film.This is not easy for a movie with horror elements. Each supporting role is short-lived but full of personality.\nThe most successful point of Happy Death Day is the creation of the hostess, with the IQ online from the beginning to the end, logic scoring full mark. As soon as discovering that she was caught in an infinite death cycle, Tree did not sit still and was fully motivated. She carried out various plans to try to find out the real murderer, and even chose to enter the next cycle in order to save the innocent.\nEven if the trailer has let the audience know what they might see, Happy Death Day tries to jump out in a relaxed and humorous way. While The woman is enthusiastic to help others, reconciling with the father, and apologising to the roommate, you will tell yourself this is certainly not the last cycle but still self-doubt by these plots. When the murderer finally revealed the face, and began to explain the ins and outs, Tree was very stunned and helpless: you were killing me over some stupid guy? Then the audience roared with laughter.\nThere may be someone who criticize that the plot of Happy Death Day is too week, with all the problems of low-cost movies, but the outstanding beauty of Jessica Rothe makes up for all the shortcomings. For a long time no actress so attracts me on the big screen. It is highly recommended to watch if there is an opportunity. Open a packet of potato chips and unscrew a bottle of Coke. This 96 minutes is absolutely enjoyable.\nOn the other hand, I have been thinking about that It is really hard to live a good life. I was touched by Seeing the woman blowing the candle telling that the birthday wish is “tomorrow”, seeing that today is the last day of your rest life from the encouraging to horror , and slowly realising the hope from today is the first day of your rest life.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/World/Happy_Death_Day.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cimg loading=\"lazy\" src=\"https://img.nickyam.com/file/b34fa6cfc452af59f9e6a.jpg\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIf you see Happy Death Day as a horror movie, you may be disappointed; but if you treat it as a chick film, this is definitely a wonderful piece that combines elements of horror, suspense, and hilarity, and will give you many surprises.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Happy Death Day"},{"content":"After the morning run, I played with my iPhone in the shade of trees.\nSuddenly there was a cry in baby’s voice from the flowerbeds. I followed the sound, and saw a lovely kitten sitting on the root of a tree, looking around. The sound in the little body was higher than a wave. When I was young, I had the talent to learn to call a cat. I then imitated a cat, and the eyes of the little kitten lit up, and approached me carefully, as if she had met her loved one. and followed me to the downstairs of the apartment. She was as small as the palm of mine, and the legs were not long enough when she stepped down.\nI hesitated about taking her home for a long time and finally decided to adopt her. I went upstairs and took a box to put her in. When I went downstairs, the little kitten was missing. I looked for a while and didn\u0026rsquo;t have her trace anywhere, and finally gave it up. I guessed someone should take her away a step ahead, and I couldn\u0026rsquo;t help but lose her. This kind of mood seemed familiar to me.\nI have met many girls who I ran into or ran into me in my 28 years of life. Some of them are just like today\u0026rsquo;s little kitten following me, but I hesitated too long to finally miss them.It’s my shortcoming which has led me to easily miss many chances, such as girls, and stocks.\nLeave a place,the scenery is no longer belongs to you;miss a person,that person would no longer do with you.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/World/Miss-a-Kitten.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eAfter the morning run, I played with my iPhone in the shade of trees.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSuddenly there was a cry in baby’s voice from the flowerbeds. I followed the sound, and saw a lovely kitten sitting on the root of a tree, looking around. The sound in the little  body was higher than a wave. When I was young, I had the talent to learn to call a cat. I then imitated a cat, and the eyes of the little kitten lit up, and approached me carefully, as if she had met her loved one. and followed me to the downstairs of the apartment. She was as small as the palm of mine, and the legs were not long enough when she stepped down.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Miss a Kitten"},{"content":"Today my mother told me something about my grandparents when I was very young, what I have forgotten.\nI lived in a village called Shanhai and studied there during my primary school time. Grandpa used to work in Hangzhou and went home once a year. Every time He came back to see me, Grangpa always valued me very much, and Grandma also said that she loved me very much. Once all the family had a dinner at my house, my mother took out the coconut juice and gave it to me. But Grandpa took it and gave it to grandmother and said that I would have the opportunity to drink in the future. I think that those who really love their grandchildren should realise that children need more nutrition in their bodies.\nBecause my grandparents and my family are next to each other, once when my mother and I were having breakfast, Grandma called Grandpa to come to our home for dishes. There was a bowl of soup over the night, and my mother and I had put the dregs in it. It happened that Grandpa wanted this bowl, and my mother said that this bowl could not be drunk. Grandpa insisted. Finally, we didn’t know if my grandparents had the soup.\nI remembered the following one. When I was in fourth grade, I wanted to learn computer. At that time, the computer was still very novel for students in rural areas. My parents were not at home, so I asked my grandmother for a registration fee. Grandma was very rich, but she refused to give me 400 yuan. Finally, I did not learn the computer. I went to the county to go to junior high school and learned the most basic computer technology while the students in other county towns were already very skilled. In the third year of high school, I had to type a application for admission to Tsinghua University. I typed so slowly in the computer room. The eyes of other students were unforgettable in my life. The most important thing is that I gave up the software college when I chose university major, and I didn’t catch up with the Internet for these years.\nDo you know how they are doing now? After retirement, they have no toilets, no washing machines, no air conditioners, and only bank deposits. When I wrote it here, I suddenly thought of Grandet in Balzac’s story.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/World/My-So-Called-Grandparents.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eToday my mother told me something about my grandparents when I was very young, what I have forgotten.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eI lived in  a village called Shanhai and studied there during my primary school time.  Grandpa used to work in Hangzhou and went home once a year. Every time He came back to see me, Grangpa always valued me very much, and Grandma also said that she loved me very much. Once all the family had a dinner at my house, my mother took out the coconut juice and gave it to me. But Grandpa took it and gave it to grandmother and said that I would have the opportunity to drink in the future. I think that those who really love their grandchildren should realise that children need more nutrition in their bodies.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"My So Called Grandparents"},{"content":"When we are young,we are often told that wolves are evil and cruel.If we weep,adults may frighten us that a wolf is coming.Many editions of the well-known fairy tale Little Red Riding Hood also describe a scaring wolf intending to swallow the little girl.After all the years,we can still think of the green creepy eyes like a ghost in the darkness.But it is not the whole thing.\nWolf is a species that lives long enough to be honored as one of the perfect species in the evolution so far by biologists.For public,Wolf reminds us of Dog,who shares the same ancestor with Wolf.I love wolf far more than dog. It is always touching that we heard about storys that a dog is so loyal to his master that he never leaves even when his master is dead.Nevertheless I appreciate more about the wolf’s loyalty,the loyalty between each other and between male and female.There is a saying that a wolf only has one lifetime campanion.I never know whether there is any law in the wolves to constraint them to do so.But in modern society we human-beings are sometiomes lack of loyalty even within the legal framework,always making one and another excuses.Is it the evolution that we are proud of?\nIn chinese culture ,we don’t like wolves.I recalls no pieces of literature which have a positive description about wolves,except a martial novel The Eleventh son written by Gu Long.Gu portrays the genius man as a lone wolf. When reading the novel,I am impressed by the man,the wolf man.It is not the super-nature creature in the American series that will turn to a wolf at full moon. it is a man who has the spirit of wolf-independent and submit to no one and nothing, iron-minded,but also tender. There is another exception Huawei,a chinese high-tech cooperation that respects the wolf culture a lot.The CEO Ren Zhengfei concludes that wolf has a keen sense of smell,offensive spirit and a sense of community.In the direction of the culture,Huawei grows to a respectful company.In Chinese history,the early Yuan Dynasty also fits this description and create a tremendous empire ever. I can’t tell that the wolf culture is a perfect one,but it truly makes up some parts that we are lack of.\nAfter thousands of years,dogs are now kept as pets while Wolf is still wolf.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/World/The_Song_of_Wolf.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eWhen we are young,we are often told that wolves are evil and cruel.If we weep,adults may frighten us that a wolf is coming.Many editions of the well-known fairy tale Little Red Riding Hood also describe a scaring wolf intending to swallow the little girl.After all the years,we can still think of the green creepy eyes like a ghost in the darkness.But it is not the whole thing.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"The Song of Wolf"},{"content":" Year 2012 is the year of Dragon. And traditonally,there is a stamp for the year in China.So this year the role is dragon.The chinese creature is not the one western people think of.The werstern dragon is aggressive,howerever the chinese creature is the symbol of the empires and happiness.In fact, the chinese dragon should be called as ‘Loong’,according to his chinese pronouncation.\nThen why i’m here to say something about ‘Loong’.Because this year’s loong on the stamp is somehow not so gentle. Someone thinks that the loong seems to imply that 2012 will be the year to show china’s strength.\nYeah, china is becoming more and more confident, and will take his responsibility. But the loong is another thing having no direct relationship with the strength. If you know something about china’s culture or history,you ‘ll understand the design of the stamp this year. Chinese people regard the Loong as the role of the God, and more too often say themselves the Descendants of the Dragon. In ancient china, only the Emperor have the power to dominate Loong. The emperor wear the clothes on which there is the images of Loong and they name themselves the god’s son of the True Loong.\nI’ll stop here because if you have interest in the chinese Loong ,you can google it for more information. Of course, if you’d like to talk with me ,just comment below~\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/World/The_New_Stamp_Of_Dragon_Year.html","summary":"\u003c!-- more --\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eYear 2012 is the year of Dragon. And traditonally,there is a stamp for the year in China.So this year the role is dragon.The chinese creature is not the one western people think of.The werstern dragon is aggressive,howerever the chinese creature is the symbol of the empires and happiness.In fact, the chinese dragon should be called as ‘Loong’,according to his chinese pronouncation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv style=\"text-align: center;\"\u003e\n  \u003cimg src=\"https://img.nickyam.com/file/bfd3d578579de0e33258e.jpg\" alt=\"The New Stamp Of Dragon Year\" /\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThen why i’m here to say something about ‘Loong’.Because this year’s loong on the stamp is somehow not so gentle. Someone thinks that the loong seems to imply that 2012 will be the year to show china’s strength.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"The New Stamp Of Dragon Year"},{"content":" As long as there are humans on earth,there comes the argument.\nYou know,the first man Adam is not alone with Eve.\nNot two leaves are the same in the world,so as humans.\nThat\u0026rsquo;s the explaination why argument is reasonable between lovers,friends,or about Academic and politics,etc.\nIf U cannot win a argument,how will you do?U can comment on this blog.\nHere i\u0026rsquo;m going to give you guys this picture:\nI am serious,but you have the right to laugh at it~\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Tech/If_U_cannot_win_a_argument.html","summary":"\u003c!-- more --\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs long as there are humans on earth,there comes the argument.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eYou know,the first man Adam is not alone with Eve.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot two leaves are the same in the world,so as humans.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThat\u0026rsquo;s the explaination why argument is reasonable between lovers,friends,or about Academic and politics,etc.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIf U cannot win a argument,how will you do?U can comment on this blog.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHere i\u0026rsquo;m going to give you guys this picture:\u003c/p\u003e","title":"If U cannot win a argument"},{"content":"We all know Speed Dial comes from Opera Browser.\nAnother innovation of the opera in the speed dial is the extension introduced to Speed ​​Dial. But I believe that this can be used in only a few plug-ins or extensions , not all plug-ins are suitable in the Speed ​​Dial.However, the original Speed ​​Dial feature, which is the bookmark feature, can indeed be expanded.\nThe following two tips is for the browsers who want to improve their product.\nSpeed ​​Dial can expand the classification function. As we know that the bookmark folder can be created, Speed ​​Dial can do so too.The specific design of the classification have two options: one is directly, in the browser interface, done for partitions. That is the classification of one-dimensional case. However, this method is relatively awkward, not very good innovation. Following this way we think of the second relatively desirable design. That is multi-dimensional design. When a label of Speed ​​Dial is a kind of a set of bookmarks, then when clicking on it , the Speed ​​Dial tab start automatically to show a new interface for the bookmark or folder of all. This is yet another dimension of the opening.\nSpeed ​​Dial in the first expansion can be further developed on the basis : a lot of browsers now want the operating system relying on itself much more,that is in the browser interface you can do more tasks. Although I can not give good advice to the specific function,the layout is about the window can also be introduced to the Speed ​​Dial, use the item one to increase the dimensions of the computer screen.\nWhich browsers will eat the crab? I still hope OPERA will do.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/Tech/The_New_Trend_of_Speed-_Dial.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eWe all know Speed Dial comes from Opera Browser.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAnother innovation of the opera in the speed dial is the extension introduced to Speed ​​Dial. But I believe that this can be used in only a few plug-ins or extensions , not all plug-ins are suitable in the Speed ​​Dial.However, the original Speed ​​Dial feature, which is the bookmark feature, can indeed be expanded.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"The New Trend of Speed ​​Dial"},{"content":"At GSUP, I talked with some Presidents of Universities. Most of the Talks were just general affairs. For instants,\u0026ldquo;Where is my seat?\u0026ldquo;or \u0026ldquo;What is the beginning time?\u0026ldquo;and so on. But the following three were interesting exceptions.\nOne of the president asked me for the toilet.\nAnd I led him to the toilet,\u0026ldquo;go straight and then turn right\u0026rdquo;.\nThe president behind me said,\u0026ldquo;Please go slowly,young man.\u0026rdquo;\nI was embarrassed for going too quickly,because it seemed impolite.\nI slowed down my pace and smiled,\u0026ldquo;It is China\u0026rsquo; Pace.\u0026rdquo;\nThen I couldn\u0026rsquo;t figure out his facial expression when the president heard my words.\nAnother President chatted with me.\nHe came to the reception early and had nothing to do.\n\u0026ldquo;Are you from Tsinghua University?\u0026rdquo;\n\u0026ldquo;Yeah.\u0026rdquo;\nHe pointed to my tie,\u0026ldquo;What a lovely tie!It is a Tsinghua Tie or your tie?\u0026rdquo;\n\u0026ldquo;Oh, it\u0026rsquo;s mine.\u0026rdquo;\nIf he had not been a western president but an Arabian , I should send the tie as a present according to his custom.\nThe third President talked to me.\n\u0026ldquo;You are the volunteer from Tsinghua University,yes?\u0026rdquo;\n\u0026ldquo;Yes.\u0026rdquo;\n\u0026ldquo;What about your major?\u0026rdquo;\n\u0026ldquo;My major is aerospace.\u0026rdquo; I answered in a quiet tone.\n\u0026ldquo;Aerospace?\u0026ldquo;Obviously,he was surprised,\u0026ldquo;I only know Beihang, does tsinghua has the major?No Kidding?\u0026ldquo;He smiled.\nThen I told him that School of Aerospace in Tsinghua was set up in 2004 and developed quickly.\nHe was satisfied and said ,\u0026ldquo;Thank you.\u0026rdquo;\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/World/Three_Lovely_Presidents_At_GSUP.html","summary":"\u003cp\u003eAt GSUP, I talked with some Presidents of Universities. Most of the Talks were just general affairs. For instants,\u0026ldquo;Where is my seat?\u0026ldquo;or \u0026ldquo;What is the beginning time?\u0026ldquo;and so on. But the following three were interesting exceptions.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"Three Lovely Presidents At GSUP"},{"content":"Welcome to Mr.Yam , a platform dedicated to bridging the gap between the East and the West. As the founder of this website, I am passionate about sharing valuable insights, cultural experiences, and thought-provoking ideas from the East with the Western world.\nHere we believe that cultural exchange and understanding are vital for a harmonious global community. Through engaging articles, captivating stories, and immersive multimedia content, we aim to provide a unique perspective on various aspects of Eastern culture, including art, philosophy, cuisine, traditions, technology and more.\nOur goal is to foster a sense of curiosity and appreciation for the rich tapestry of Eastern heritage. Whether you are a seasoned traveler, a student of different cultures, or simply someone with a thirst for knowledge, Mr.Yam is here to enlighten and inspire you.\nFeel free to explore our website and immerse yourself in the vibrant world of the East. We encourage you to join the conversation, share your thoughts, and connect with like-minded individuals who share a passion for cultural exploration.\nIf you have any questions, suggestions, or would like to collaborate, please don\u0026rsquo;t hesitate to reach out to me at:me@nickyam.com\nTogether, let us embark on a journey of discovery, as : East tells West.\n","permalink":"https://mr.nickyam.com/about/","summary":"\u003cp\u003eWelcome to \u003ca href=\"https://mr.nickyam.com\"\u003eMr.Yam\u003c/a\u003e , a platform dedicated to bridging the gap between the East and the West. As the founder of this website, I am passionate about sharing valuable insights, cultural experiences, and thought-provoking ideas from the East with the Western world.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHere we believe that cultural exchange and understanding are vital for a harmonious global community. Through engaging articles, captivating stories, and immersive multimedia content, we aim to provide a unique perspective on various aspects of Eastern culture, including art, philosophy, cuisine, traditions, technology and more.\u003c/p\u003e","title":"About"}]