Has today's $ZAMA all been newly listed? The profits are really substantial, especially for those who have hedged early!
I hope that more and more quality projects can cooperate with Binance.
Many people talk about Plasma and will mention 'BTC sidechains' or the idea of being 'closer to the Bitcoin ecosystem'. The underlying logic is actually not complicated: BTC is the largest value carrier, and stablecoins are the strongest circulating carriers. If BTC can more smoothly enter a network centered around stablecoin payments, then on one side there are 'stable' assets, and on the other side, there is 'usable' currency, which naturally complements each other in narrative. For the market, this means a higher capital ceiling, richer capital usage paths, and it becomes easier to form a cycle of 'assets entering → on-chain use → returning to settlement'.
But to clearly see this narrative, you must separate two things: one is the 'vision', and the other is the 'implementation method'. The vision is easy to understand—making it easier for BTC to participate in the on-chain finance and payment ecosystem; the difficulty lies in the implementation method, which centers on the trust model and security boundaries of the 'bridge'. The so-called 'native' or 'safer' way for BTC to enter ultimately needs to answer: who is responsible for asset custody? How is the verification mechanism designed? In extreme cases, can users exit? This is not something that can be solved with a slogan; it requires long-term engineering and auditing accumulation.
So my attitude towards the BTC narrative is: it can be expected, but it must be measured with verifiable progress. Looking at the BTC direction of Plasma, the most important thing is not to listen to who tells the story, but to continuously track: whether BTC-related channels are online, whether the capital inflow structure is healthy, and whether the bridge's security model is sufficiently transparent. Narratives can bring attention, but implementation can bring long-term value.