明天可以暴富吗's Profile

$SIREN This is the end, right? With such a large upper shadow, I saw big V praising it yesterday. Big V praising it equals the top! Let's short it and see.

SIREN-1.86%

明天可以暴富吗

·

--

$SIREN What is this thing, so fierce, which big brother can explain the direction?

SIREN-1.86%

明天可以暴富吗

·

--

After breaking through the platform $RIVER , it retraced, and now there is a trend of continuing to push up again, wanting more.

RIVER-3.62%

明天可以暴富吗

·

--

$TURBO The rebound is not strong, let's see how today's daily line closes. If it closes in the red, then short it.

TURBO+1.46%

明天可以暴富吗

·

--

This position can't be accessed anymore at $BTR , this line is for stop loss, short sell in.

BTR-2.07%

明天可以暴富吗

·

--

$RIVER On the daily chart, this rebound should not last. Now, setting a stop loss around 28.8 for shorting can be tried. If it goes down, there is still a lot of space.

RIVER-3.62%

明天可以暴富吗

·

--

$ANKR This trend is strong, it has already broken through, bullish open for a surge

ANKR0.00%

明天可以暴富吗

·

--

$UAI is very weak, let go of one hand

UAI+9.55%

明天可以暴富吗

·

--

$EDGE why hasn’t it dropped yet啊😭

EDGE-3.44%

明天可以暴富吗

·

--

Article

Having no black history does not mean there is no risk, but these two things are indeed different.

Last month I bought a second-hand car. Before looking at the car, I specifically checked the accident history of this vehicle, and the platform showed no major accidents, which relieved me at the time. But later, a friend who knows cars told me that having no accident record only means there haven't been any major accidents reported. Minor scrapes, engine noises, electrical issues—these things won't be in the accident record. You have to check yourself or find a professional to inspect it. At that moment, I realized that having no record and having no problems are two completely different things. The former is a lack of information, not proof of safety.

NIGHT+1.17%

明天可以暴富吗

·

--

$EDGE This thing should drop, right? Just now it tricked me into getting on the bus, it should be cut.

EDGE-3.44%

明天可以暴富吗

·

--

Article

57,000 addresses, but I don't know how many people are really using it

This afternoon I was scrolling through Twitter and came across an account posting about Midnight. The writing was quite serious, with data and analysis included, and the mechanism was explained clearly. After reading it, I felt that this piece was of higher quality than most official content released by project teams themselves. However, when I scrolled down to the comments section, there were basically no comments, a few likes in single digits, and zero shares, so it just sank into obscurity. I sat there for a while and thought about what the dissemination status of this project in the community really is. Are there people actually talking about it, or are there only a few individuals talking to themselves, with the outside appearing lively while just a few people are circulating ideas?

NIGHT+1.17%

明天可以暴富吗

·

--

I have a habit: when I see a cryptocurrency surge dramatically, my first reaction is never to jump in; instead, I ask: what is the reason for its rise at this time? $SIGN rose 131.5% in two weeks, but what really made me stop and look was not this number, but the few days it started, which coincided perfectly with the point when the situation in the Middle East began to visibly spiral out of control; this alignment is too precise to be a coincidence. Many people, upon seeing geopolitical turmoil, instinctively buy gold or Bitcoin. To be honest, this line of thinking isn't wrong, but it is somewhat lazy. What truly causes anxiety is not where the money is going, but whether the trust system built around money will collapse along with it. Will your account still be recognized? Will your identity still hold value in other countries? Once these things start to waver, holding onto US dollars doesn't provide much security. What Sign is doing, to put it bluntly, is relocating this trust system onto the blockchain, without relying on any one bank or government to back it. I have always been immune to "grand narratives," so I directly looked into what concrete actions it has taken. In 2025, @SignOfficial went to Kyrgyzstan to help the national bank develop a CBDC, and then went to Sierra Leone to build a national digital identity system. These places share a common point: low bank penetration and fewer historical burdens, making them more receptive to an entirely new digital infrastructure. TokenTable generated 15 million dollars in revenue in 2024 and handled over 40 billion dollars in token distribution. To be honest, there are not many projects in Web3 infrastructure that can present such figures. But I won't label it as safe just because of these. Government cooperation, from signing contracts to implementation, can involve many variables that are unpredictable. Yan Xin himself has said he has seen projects burn through tens of millions and ultimately not launch; this is not a joke; it is reality. Having the right direction doesn't necessarily mean you will reach the destination. #sign地缘政治基建 $SIGN

I have a habit: when I see a cryptocurrency surge dramatically, my first reaction is never to jump in; instead, I ask: what is the reason for its rise at this time? $SIGN rose 131.5% in two weeks, but what really made me stop and look was not this number, but the few days it started, which coincided perfectly with the point when the situation in the Middle East began to visibly spiral out of control; this alignment is too precise to be a coincidence.
Many people, upon seeing geopolitical turmoil, instinctively buy gold or Bitcoin. To be honest, this line of thinking isn't wrong, but it is somewhat lazy. What truly causes anxiety is not where the money is going, but whether the trust system built around money will collapse along with it. Will your account still be recognized? Will your identity still hold value in other countries? Once these things start to waver, holding onto US dollars doesn't provide much security. What Sign is doing, to put it bluntly, is relocating this trust system onto the blockchain, without relying on any one bank or government to back it.
I have always been immune to "grand narratives," so I directly looked into what concrete actions it has taken. In 2025, @SignOfficial went to Kyrgyzstan to help the national bank develop a CBDC, and then went to Sierra Leone to build a national digital identity system. These places share a common point: low bank penetration and fewer historical burdens, making them more receptive to an entirely new digital infrastructure. TokenTable generated 15 million dollars in revenue in 2024 and handled over 40 billion dollars in token distribution. To be honest, there are not many projects in Web3 infrastructure that can present such figures.
But I won't label it as safe just because of these. Government cooperation, from signing contracts to implementation, can involve many variables that are unpredictable. Yan Xin himself has said he has seen projects burn through tens of millions and ultimately not launch; this is not a joke; it is reality. Having the right direction doesn't necessarily mean you will reach the destination.
#sign地缘政治基建 $SIGN

BTC+0.38%

SIGN-0.06%

明天可以暴富吗

·

--

Article

I have been thinking about one thing recently: who will be the first to suffer in wartime?

Recently, I saw a piece of news that Goldman Sachs issued a warning stating that if the Strait of Hormuz closes for two months, the GDP of Qatar and Kuwait could shrink directly by 14%, and Saudi Arabia and the UAE would also suffer. When I saw this number, my first reaction was not to short oil, but to think of something more specific: the digital currencies, national identity systems, and government subsidy distributions that these countries are currently promoting. If these things run on centralized servers, how fragile is this system when war breaks out?
This is not a hypothesis; it has actually happened. After the Iranian airstrike, Tehran's internet and electricity were intermittent, and the traditional banking system there was directly paralyzed. Ordinary people could not transfer money or prove their identity, and had to rely on cryptocurrency to escape. Data shows that during those days, Iran's outflow of cryptocurrency surged by hundreds of percentage points. This incident taught me a lesson: centralized systems, in extreme situations, are just a single point. Once this point has a problem, everything running on top of it is doomed.

SIGN-0.06%

明天可以暴富吗

·

--

Last year, there was an on-chain security report that left a deep impression on me. In December 2025, the security incident losses in the entire crypto market decreased by more than 60% month-on-month. It sounds like good news, but there was a sentence in the report that I read several times: the risk structure has shifted, with personal wallets and multi-signature wallets becoming the hardest hit areas. Address poisoning and private key leakage have replaced contract vulnerabilities as the mainstream attack methods. In other words, the chain is becoming safer, but individuals are becoming less safe. This matter is particularly worth considering in the context of @MidnightNetwork . Midnight's privacy architecture has a core design: private states are not on-chain, calculations are completed locally by users, and ZK proofs are submitted to the public chain after generation. From the perspective of the chain, this design is clean; private data will never have the chance to be exposed on-chain, but it also means that the security boundary of key management is entirely on the user side, and the chain itself cannot help you. Midnight has two sets of key logic that need to be managed simultaneously. The public layer's NIGHT token follows a standard non-custodial wallet system, while the private layer's shielded transactions have an independent key system responsible for managing local private states. Both of these are in the user's hands. The Lace wallet encapsulates cryptographic operations, so users are unaware of the complexity, but being unaware does not mean the risk is absent. What's more troublesome is that developers have discovered on GitHub that the address derivation method for Lace v2's Midnight address is fundamentally different from that generated by the official SDK. This bug exposes a deeper issue: as the complexity of key management increases, differences in software implementation can directly turn into asset risks for users, and this type of risk is harder to detect in privacy systems than in ordinary chains because when private states have issues, there are no anomalies visible on the chain. In terms of direction, I think Midnight's design is correct, but the user-side security is a real shortcoming, not a design flaw, but a gap in execution that has yet to be addressed. After the mainnet is up and running, this will be a key area I monitor closely. #night $NIGHT

Last year, there was an on-chain security report that left a deep impression on me. In December 2025, the security incident losses in the entire crypto market decreased by more than 60% month-on-month. It sounds like good news, but there was a sentence in the report that I read several times: the risk structure has shifted, with personal wallets and multi-signature wallets becoming the hardest hit areas. Address poisoning and private key leakage have replaced contract vulnerabilities as the mainstream attack methods.
In other words, the chain is becoming safer, but individuals are becoming less safe.
This matter is particularly worth considering in the context of @MidnightNetwork . Midnight's privacy architecture has a core design: private states are not on-chain, calculations are completed locally by users, and ZK proofs are submitted to the public chain after generation. From the perspective of the chain, this design is clean; private data will never have the chance to be exposed on-chain, but it also means that the security boundary of key management is entirely on the user side, and the chain itself cannot help you.
Midnight has two sets of key logic that need to be managed simultaneously. The public layer's NIGHT token follows a standard non-custodial wallet system, while the private layer's shielded transactions have an independent key system responsible for managing local private states. Both of these are in the user's hands. The Lace wallet encapsulates cryptographic operations, so users are unaware of the complexity, but being unaware does not mean the risk is absent. What's more troublesome is that developers have discovered on GitHub that the address derivation method for Lace v2's Midnight address is fundamentally different from that generated by the official SDK. This bug exposes a deeper issue: as the complexity of key management increases, differences in software implementation can directly turn into asset risks for users, and this type of risk is harder to detect in privacy systems than in ordinary chains because when private states have issues, there are no anomalies visible on the chain.
In terms of direction, I think Midnight's design is correct, but the user-side security is a real shortcoming, not a design flaw, but a gap in execution that has yet to be addressed. After the mainnet is up and running, this will be a key area I monitor closely.
#night $NIGHT

NIGHT+1.17%

明天可以暴富吗

Having no black history does not mean there is no risk, but these two things are indeed different.

57,000 addresses, but I don't know how many people are really using it

I have been thinking about one thing recently: who will be the first to suffer in wartime?

Trending Topics