BNBwusuo

The Web3 application store disguised as a public blockchain, Vanar is taking a bit of a risk.
After looking around at the recent popular AI concept coins, most are just telling stories with PowerPoint presentations, and very few are actually viable. What attracts me to Vanar is its approach to the metaverse and AI data, especially its verification layer designed for agent interactions, which really has something to it. Unlike Render, which only focuses on rendering power, it attempts to solve the trust issues in data interactions between agents. When testing the integration of Virtua on the testnet, the response speed of prop generation was almost indistinguishable from that of a centralized server, which is indeed much stronger than the occasional congestion experience with Polygon; that kind of seamless interaction is what future blockchain games should look like.
However, the biggest problem with this project right now is that it feels a bit too highbrow and niche. No matter how impressive the technical architecture is, it's useless if there are no people in the ecosystem. The current Vanar feels like a newly built empty city; the roads are wide, and the buildings are beautiful, but there are not many people on the streets. Although the official team has been promoting various partners, for retail investors like us, it's hard to have the motivation to deeply participate without seeing real wealth effects first. Moreover, the compatibility of the official wallet sometimes acts up, and connecting to a DApp requires several attempts; this kind of basic bug is really frustrating, and I hope it can be fixed quickly.
The current market environment is too volatile; everyone likes to chase after meme coins, and projects that want to create serious infrastructure tend to be overlooked. However, looking at it another way, if Vanar can truly bring in those big Web2 IPs and smooth out the traffic, then the current low valuation could be an opportunity. But that depends on whether the project team's subsequent operations can keep up; otherwise, the technology might be ready but the market enthusiasm could cool down. In this circle of existing competition, the time left for Vanar to prove itself is actually not much; having a technological barrier is not enough, it also needs a killer feature to retain users.
@Vanarchain $VANRY
#Vanar

Don't be fooled by Dusk's current pitiful TPS data; Piecrust is the ace up the sleeve.
Last night, I stayed up all night running through the environment configuration of the Piecrust virtual machine. To be honest, the threshold is ridiculously high. If you're used to copying and pasting code with one click on Ethereum Remix, you will definitely hit a wall here. Just the dependency issues of that Rust compilation chain are enough to make one lose their hair, but after I gritted my teeth and got through it, I realized that its underlying zero-knowledge proof logic is completely different from those Layer 2 solutions currently on the market. Most Rollups are busy compressing data to save Gas fees, while Dusk generates privacy proofs locally. I tried running a simple transfer script and was surprised to find that its memory usage is quite restrained, unlike some high-performance public chains that consume hardware like a starving wolf. This detail is actually crucial because if we want ordinary computers to run full nodes in the future, this kind of lightweight design is essential.
However, there are a ton of pain points; the current wallet interaction is simply a disaster scene, often getting stuck when generating Proof, making me think the chain has crashed. If this experience were during a bull market, it would definitely be criticized to death. Compared to Midnight or Aleo, Dusk feels more like an industrial machine without any decorations, rather than those flashy consumer-grade electronic products. Currently, on-chain liquidity is indeed looking dire, but this precisely indicates that it doesn't intend to please the funds rushing for quick gains. It is stubbornly sticking to an extremely narrow track, which is to build a dedicated channel for securities assets that require both privacy and fear regulatory crackdowns. Once this path is successfully navigated, future entrants will be unable to catch up, as this kind of rigorous compliance restriction starting from the compiler level is not something that ordinary project teams can replicate.
#Dusk @Dusk $DUSK

The current market atmosphere is very restless, everyone is focusing on those king-level projects that have raised billions of dollars, and all they talk about is parallel EVM and chain abstraction. But I have always held the view that the most basic needs often contain the greatest Alpha. The reason why Tron has lasted so long is that it addresses the most painful pain point: transfers. Plasma's current approach is very clever; it does not compete with Ethereum in terms of ecosystem, nor does it compete with Solana in terms of memes; it just aims to create a more transparent and efficient settlement layer.
After deeply experiencing Plasma's mainnet for two days, the smoothness of the second-level confirmations really got me a bit addicted. It seems that on the consensus level, it has specifically optimized for high-concurrency transactions, completely avoiding the problem of fluctuating fees during congestion like Tron. This level of certainty is too important for commercial payments; merchants cannot accept a payment getting stuck halfway due to insufficient Gas. From the perspective of investment risk-reward ratio, Tron's current market value is already a huge entity, and doubling that is as difficult as climbing to the sky. In contrast, Plasma's current market value is not even a fraction of Tron's; as long as it can capture 10% of Tron's payment share, the price potential for XPL is exponential.
However, when we do research, we cannot only see the thief eating meat without seeing the thief getting beaten. Plasma's current shortcoming is very obvious, which is that there are too few native assets. Apart from U, there are almost no other decent asset deposits on-chain. This has led to a somewhat high current empty block rate. However, I recently saw in the community that they are working on incentive proposals for cross-chain bridges, seemingly wanting to attract large holders to move their assets over through subsidies. This is actually a classic strategy used by exchanges to grab users early on; if executed properly, the cold start issue is not unsolvable.
For the asset XPL, I suggest everyone treat it as an option in the payment track. The current price is essentially at the bottom, with very limited downside potential. Instead of chasing those highly valued air public chains, it's better to ambush this kind of infrastructure with actual business scenarios. The current crypto circle has passed the stage where you can pump prices just by telling stories; in the end, it all comes down to who can really bring Web2 funds in. I am optimistic about Plasma not because of how impressive the technology is, but because it understands human nature and knows that users don't want to pay Gas fees.
@Plasma $XPL
#plasma

In the past two years, the GameFi sector has cooled down significantly, and the root cause is that the threshold is too high. It's like asking a user accustomed to one-click login in Honor of Kings to remember 12 mnemonic words; it's simply a fantasy. Recently, while researching the account abstraction solution of Vanar Chain, I discovered that they really understand the pain points of Web2 developers. Compared to Immutable X, which requires an additional layer of registration logic, Vanar's SDK can almost reduce the blockchain's presence to zero.
I tried to integrate their payment module in my local environment, and was surprised to find that due to the extremely low wear of Gas fees and the payment mechanism, I could completely absorb the on-chain costs on the backend. This means that players do not need to know what ETH or Gas is when buying equipment; the experience is almost indistinguishable from in-app purchases in the App Store. In contrast, Solana, although it has high TPS, the frequency of wallet pop-ups can drive people crazy, making it impossible to create an immersive experience. Vanar's strategy of 'subtle and unobtrusive' is the only solution for Mass Adoption.
However, as much as I praise it, there are still numerous issues at this stage. Vanar's documentation is indeed too rudimentary, with many key parameter definitions being ambiguous, and I have to dive into the Github source code to guess what they mean. Moreover, the current distribution of nodes on the mainnet appears to be quite centralized. While sacrificing a bit of decentralization for efficiency is acceptable, if there is too much reliance on a few super nodes, the narrative of security becomes untenable. Right now, Vanar is like a luxury house that is only half decorated; the hard decoration is nice, but the soft decoration and utilities are not fully functional yet. To truly live comfortably, we still have to wait a bit longer.
@Vanarchain $VANRY
#Vanar

Now the whole world is shouting RWA, even old-fashioned companies like BlackRock are starting to move ETFs to the blockchain, making it seem like Wall Street is about to be swallowed by DeFi tomorrow. But after reviewing Dusk's latest GitHub commits, I felt a chill down my spine. These people are not creating the kind of open financial public chain we understand; they are replicating a penetrating regulatory system on the blockchain. I looked at the XSC token standard, and it embeds identity hooks in the underlying protocol.
Even if it claims to be a privacy public chain, its privacy is conditional. Unlike Monero, which simply hides everything, Dusk implements a form of "provable compliance." When I tried to deploy a contract, I found that if your wallet address had not gone through some form of on-chain identity marking, many operations would be directly rejected at the base level. This is much harsher than the simple whitelist contract methods on Ethereum because it is written at the consensus layer. It's like having an invisible auditor standing next to you during a transfer; while they can't see how much you're transferring, they can see whether you have the qualification to make the transfer.
Compared to competitors like Polymesh, which specializes in security tokenization, Dusk appears greedier. It wants both permissionless access of a public chain and compliance control of a consortium chain. This design of wanting both has resulted in an extremely fragmented interaction experience. While you may have the private key, you do not fully possess the right of disposal, which is very offensive to us native crypto believers. Moreover, the current liquidity is simply dreadful; most DeFi protocols choose to stand by because they cannot adapt to such complex compliance standards. This is why its ecosystem looks like a ghost town. But conversely, if in the future we really want to move trillions of dollars' worth of stocks and bonds onto the blockchain, would institutions dare to use those dog chains that have even a one in ten thousand chance of being hacked? Dusk’s approach of tying security around the neck may indeed be the only antidote prepared for those timid fund managers.
#Dusk @Dusk $DUSK

In the past few days, I've been reviewing the infrastructure of this cycle and found that everyone is focused on performance, as if not reaching a TPS of one hundred thousand is embarrassing for releasing a white paper. However, I have always maintained the view that high performance without real application scenarios is just a gimmick. I am optimistic about Plasma not because its technology is flashy, but because its entry point is so precise, focusing directly on stablecoin payments. This team clearly understands finance; they haven't gone for those fancy L3 or L4 solutions, but have instead connected fiat deposit and withdrawal channels directly at the L1 layer. While reviewing their latest documentation, I discovered that they are building a clearing layer that can bypass the traditional SWIFT system, which is a much larger ambition than just creating a public chain.
Compared to today's TRON, Plasma's code structure is clearly more modern. TRON's current pain point is the skyrocketing fees during network congestion, and that ecosystem is filled with various low-quality projects, making the funds very dirty. For institutions, such an environment is not suitable for large capital investments. Plasma feels like a banking system that is even somewhat fastidious; it has made many compromises and balances in node admission and transaction privacy protection. Although this design sacrifices a certain degree of decentralization fundamentalism, it is necessary for the vision of attracting Web2 commercial giants.
Of course, I must mention the risks as well; the current price trend of XPL indeed resembles an electrocardiogram, barely alive and lingering at the bottom. Most retail investors in the community lack patience, constantly urging the project team to take action to pump the price. However, I flipped through their commit records, and the development progress has actually not stopped. This state of writing code without caring about the secondary market oddly makes me feel a little more at ease. Those projects that are frequently opening spaces and boasting in the market often die the fastest. Moreover, the current support for XPL from major exchanges is still insufficient, with withdrawal and deposit channels occasionally under maintenance, which has indeed discouraged many people. If you are the type who trades short-term based on candlesticks, this coin will definitely torment you. But if you can understand the layout behind Tether and are willing to trade time for space, then this currently neglected phase might be the best accumulation interval. After all, in the crypto world, when everyone knows something is good, you can no longer take the market.
@Plasma $XPL
#plasma

Peeling back the layers of the AI public chain, Vanar is one of the few projects that isn't just making PPTs to sell cars. The current cryptocurrency market has a pathological tendency; as long as a project's white paper includes "AI + DeFi," its market value can double out of thin air. After reviewing several so-called AI public chains, most are simply leveraging IPFS, storing model training data as a hash and daring to call it "AI native." This kind of misleading behavior is an insult to developers' intelligence. What caught my attention about Vanar Chain is its attempt to solve the "black box" problem in the AI inference process. After extensive testing, I found that Vanar does not directly compete with Nvidia's computing power market; that's something Render should handle. Vanar acts more like a savvy intermediary, implementing a layer of verification logic on-chain to ensure that the actions of AI Agents are traceable and immutable. This is particularly evident when compared to ICP; although ICP's technology is hardcore, its Canister architecture is very unfriendly to ordinary developers, with a steep learning curve akin to the Himalayas. Meanwhile, Vanar retains the affinity of EVM while pre-compiling an AI instruction set at the base level, making this "new wine in old bottles" strategy evidently more pragmatic. However, despite the praise, the current experience with Vanar does have many hard flaws. The claimed high TPS does not perform as smoothly in actual stress tests, especially when handling continuous high-frequency transactions, where data updates in the browser exhibit noticeable lag. This disconnect between front-end display and back-end confirmation easily fosters distrust among users. Additionally, the relatively small number of validation nodes raises doubts about the degree of decentralization, and if nodes conspire to commit wrongdoing, the so-called security validation becomes meaningless. For us tech purists, Vanar presents a beautiful vision, but there is still a long muddy road to travel before achieving a true "AI infrastructure." @Vanar $VANRY #Vanar

Watching the recent on-chain gas fees being driven up by various animal coins, I am fixated on the TPS in the Dusk browser that seems to have stagnated if not looked at closely, and I truly feel mixed emotions about it. The current market trend is too restless; everyone is pursuing that kind of thrill of a hundred or a thousand times return. Who still wants to settle down and study asset rights confirmation and privacy compliance? But I actually feel that it is this calm, which is out of sync with market hotspots, that makes Dusk seem a bit interesting. I studied its latest XSC 2.0 standard and found that this group of people has long surpassed the simple whitelist mechanism in their understanding of "compliance".
Comparing it with the Avalanche subnet, which also provides institutional services, Avalanche adopts physical isolation, creating a private chain for its own amusement; whereas Dusk aims to turn "regulation" into a verifiable code logic in a public chain environment through zero-knowledge proofs. For example, when I tested its securities token transfer, the system automatically verifies my identity qualifications at the underlying level, but no node in the network knows who I am, only that "this guy is qualified to buy this stock". This logic of wanting both is really self-defeating in terms of technical implementation. I glanced at its consensus node requirements, and to run these complex zero-knowledge circuits, the hardware threshold is indeed not low, which directly deters a large wave of those looking to profit by idling.
This is also why its community always seems to be half-alive; after all, without the wealth creation effect, there is no traffic. The current Dusk resembles an overly serious German engineer, while everyone else is dancing at the crazy party, it is still in the corner measuring whether the floor is level with a ruler. This kind of stubborn spirit looks quite silly during a bull market and even seems a bit wasteful. But once the tide goes out, when the regulatory hammer really strikes DeFi, and when traditional stocks and bonds really need a safe and private on-chain dwelling, these underlying infrastructures that now seem cumbersome and uninteresting may be the true carriers of trillion-level funds. It just takes a Zen-like mindset to hold onto it before this moment arrives. #Dusk @Dusk $DUSK

After reviewing several so-called king-level public chains in my hands recently, I found that the entire industry has fallen into a strange loop of technical self-indulgence. Everyone is talking about modularization and parallel execution layers, and the white papers are written in a confusing manner, resulting in scams and air running on the chain. On the contrary, projects like Plasma that stubbornly focus on the payment track have shown me a glimmer of hope for landing. What I care about has never been some false indicator of millions of TPS, but the courage to directly benchmark against traditional finance.

After深入研究了他们的技术架构, I found that the team is very clear about where the current pain points lie. They haven't engaged in flashy innovations of smart contracts, but instead focused all their energy on how to make blockchain incomprehensible to ordinary people. The current threshold of Web3 is too high; if you want to teach a newcomer what Gas Price is and what authorization means, before you finish explaining, they have already run away in fear. Plasma has encapsulated all these underlying logics, attempting to achieve an instant and simple feeling similar to WeChat transfers. If this logic can be successfully implemented, it will attract not only the existing funds in the crypto space but also truly massive Web2 users.

From the code submission situation, these people are indeed working hard, unlike some project teams that start touring the world after issuing tokens. However, there are also significant risks involved, with the biggest problem being liquidity. The reason why Tron is strong is that the liquidity of USDT is locked on it, with Tether issuing hundreds of billions of USDT. For Plasma to snatch food from the tiger's mouth, it's not enough to have good technology; it also depends on whether the BD team can negotiate with those large stablecoin issuers. Currently, the price trends are still at the bottom, and the market has clearly not realized the strategic position of payment public chains in the next cycle. For those of us doing research, rather than chasing after those AI coins that only have narratives and no revenue in the secondary market, it is better to ambush this infrastructure that has fundamental demand support. As long as there are people who need to transfer money, as long as there are people who need cross-border payments, this network will have value. I am optimistic about its future explosive power, but I must also remind you to maintain a light position and observe before large-scale integration in second-tier exchanges or mainstream wallets; don’t get caught before dawn.
@Plasma $XPL
#plasma

Rejecting the Data Black Hole: Why I Am Optimistic About the Programmability of Walrus
Many people see Web3 storage as a simple replacement for Web2 cloud storage, and this view is quite superficial. Over the past few days, I have been studying Walrus's white paper and code, and I found that its most attractive feature is not 'storage', but 'usage'. On the Ethereum side, storing data is prohibitively expensive, so everyone can only throw their data into IPFS and leave a hash value on-chain. This sense of disconnection is very uncomfortable; data seems to have fallen into a black hole, and on-chain contracts have no idea what the data looks like.
Walrus relies on Sui's high performance to create an interesting 'Blob storage'. I don't like to use jargon; simply put, it turns storage into Lego blocks. You can directly command these data in smart contracts and even allow data to flow between different dApps. This is essential for today's full-chain games and NFT projects. Just imagine, the attributes of the equipment and model data in your game can directly interoperate on-chain, instead of linking to an external image; this experience is a qualitative leap.
However, I still need to pour a bit of cold water on this. The current Walrus ecosystem is still in a very early stage. Although the technical logic is self-consistent, whether it can attract enough nodes to ensure decentralization is still an unknown. When I was running nodes, I found that the bandwidth requirements are actually not low, which poses a barrier to ordinary users' participation. Moreover, there are quite a few competing products on the market, such as EthStorage, which is also doing similar things, and the competition will be very fierce.
There is an interesting detail; when I was testing the retrieval function, I found that it actually supports direct access via HTTP, without needing to install any messy plugins. This seamless experience is the key to potentially breaking out of the current sphere. Stop thinking about educating users to use complex Web3 tools; it is the right approach to hide the technology in the background like Walrus does, allowing users to access decentralized content as if they were browsing a regular webpage. I even think it may reshape our understanding of CDN; in the future, content distribution may really not require centralized servers anymore.
@Walrus 🦭/acc $WAL
#Walrus