SoldBit

Bitcoin and Crypto stuff.

[SoldBit @SoulBitcoin]

인벤팅 비트코인(Inventing Bitcoin): 가장 쉽게 풀어쓴 비트코인 입문서!

본서의 옮긴이로써 원저자와 합의하에 무료 배포를 진행합니다!

@skwp #Bitcoin

https://t.co/8grvuenlHG

[Adam @Adam_Tehc]

There's this one guy (bwam... & BwaV) who wakes up every single day and creates 300+ tokens.

Every. Single. Day.

He's made anywhere from 50-400 SOL per day since January (~$500K per month).

Complete savage.

[Jason Choi @mrjasonchoi]

Over the past few years I was fortunate enough to trade/angel invest my own capital, free of any mandates or constraints.

During the same time, I also shut down my podcast business of 7 years where I talked to founders and investors across the Web 3 industry.

In my prior life as a VC primarily focused on Web 3, I felt conditioned to constantly see and evangelize the most bullish outcome for crypto, no matter how outlandish.

After all, to bet on any venture at early stage, or cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin or projects like Solana when they were nothing but a few lines of code and a whitepaper, required imagination and blind belief, not realism.

At the same time, as someone helping build a nascent institutional fund and a content business from scratch back then, my career very much depended on the destiny of crypto as an industry. 

Over the past few years as an independent investor, I felt myself slowly shedding these inherent biases I unknowingly carried.

I still want crypto to succeed as an industry, but my livelihood no longer needs it to. I don’t need to pretend I’m excited about the 23rd L2 on Ethereum unless I actually am.

I have the option to never touch crypto again, never talk to anyone in this industry again, and never open X again and have my future unaffected.

Given this I feel I have been able to look at the industry with a sobriety and clarity that I couldn’t before.

A part of me was concerned that without the need for self-delusion I’ll come to the same conclusion as many cynics: that crypto perhaps is good for nothing except speculation, that this is a thinly veiled casino for gambling and nothing else, and the cypherpunk dream is exactly just that - a dream.

I’m glad to say that that’s not the conclusion I came to.

I’d like to think I’m more discerning with who I work with and what I bet on than before, perhaps even a tad more PvP when it comes to trading markets to keep up with you lots - but I’m unequivocally bullish on the need for a trust layer for the world.

And you - the people who are still here - are exactly the right people to build it.

[Woj Kulikowski @wojventures]

nfts, crypto payments now allowed in ios apps

generational bull run for crypto consumer apps

[Lunch Protocol @lunch_xyz]

IT’S FINALLY $LUNCH TIME!

The table’s set. The dish is hot.
Order your $LUNCH on @FjordFoundry!

👉 https://t.co/7jJbaKNeLu

First Come, First Served!

[William Huo @wmhuo168]

The dollar just lost a round in the global currency war. While the West slept, China’s CIPS cleared more cross-border payments than SWIFT. April 16 may be remembered as the day the tide turned.

[hansolar @hansolar21]

덤핑 종착국 대한민국

오늘 -90% 빠진 OM(맨트라)을 보고 묘한 기분이 들어 한글로 글을 써봅니다.
(검머외라 글이 좀 어설플 수 있습니다)

이번주가 ‘이더리움 서울’ 컨프런스라 각 종 해외 프로젝트들이 한국에 와서 자기네 프로젝트랑 코인을 홍보하는 주입니다.

그중에 건전한 프로젝트들도 있겠지만… 그렇지 않은 경우도 많다는 건 잘 아실겁니다.

오늘 한국에서 만트라(OM)라는 프로젝트가 RWA 관련 컨퍼런스를 주최했는데요, 아이러니하게도 어제 몇시간만에 최대 95%까지 폭락하기도 했습니다.
https://t.co/QE2XuzIYYM
순식간에 7조원의 시장가치가 날아간 샘입니다.

스캠 프로젝트인건 분명한데…
이런 프로젝트가 한국에 왜 왔을까요?

결국 또 한국인들을 대상으로 엑싯하려고 온거겠죠.

이름 좀 알리고, 업비트랑 빗썸이랑 상장 관련 회의도 하고, 상장비 네고도하고 상장을 진행하려고 했었겠죠?

다행이도 그전에 언락물량이 관리가 안돼서 한국 피해자는 많지 않아 보입니다.
하지만 이런 행보가 언제까지 반복될지 의문입니다.

한국은 이미 크립토계의 '덤핑 국가'로 자리 잡은 지 오래 됐습니다.

아래 차트는 최근에 상장한 업비트 코인들입니다.
상장시점에 샀을 경우 Virtual는 -73%, Bonk는 -73%, Cow는 -28%.

하입 사이클로 보면, 업비트 상장 시점은 ‘붕괴 단계’에 해당하는 경우가 많습니다.
크립토에서는 스마트 머니 → 기관 투자자 → 대중투자자 → 코리안 투자자로 보시면 될 것같습니다.

위 차트들은 2025년 기준이지만, 김치 프리미엄 데이터를 보면 이 현상이 오래전부터 반복되고 있었음을 알 수 있습니다.
한국의 매수 강도가 가장 높을 때가 늘 꼭짓점이었습니다.
그 다음 바이어가 더 이상 없는 거죠.

그래서 해외 프로젝트들이 시간 들이고 돈 들여서 한국에 오는 겁니다.
엑싯을하려고.

친절을 호의로 착각하지 않았으면 좋겠네요.

[Nathan | Factomind @NathanYJLee]

이더 @ethereum

이게
더 떨어지네?

[Kush Desai @KushDesai47]

No we literally calculated tariff and non tariff barriers.

https://t.co/GiWRU6gJDv

[Liz Ann Sonders @LizAnnSonders]

We may be seeing early stages of tectonic shift in global investment flows, with dramatic decline in demand for U.S. assets from abroad (fastest-ever pace of U.S. equity selling by official sector in single month and largest monthly outflow of U.S. assets by private sector investors in a year)
@ReutersBiz @Refinitiv

[Lyn Alden @LynAldenContact]

My answer is quantum computing.

There are ways to navigate it, but there are disruption risks for a decentralized system when upgrading to being quantum hard.

And ahead of time, smart capital will calculate probabilities of disruption, and allocate accordingly.

[Chicken Genius @pakpakchicken]

BTC Executive order is bullish long term + no shitcoin buying.

Quote:
"The Secretaries of Treasury and Commerce are authorized to develop budget-neutral strategies for acquiring additional bitcoin, provided that those strategies have no incremental costs on American taxpayers"

6 plausible budget-neutral strategies they might consider:

1 - Issuing Treasury Instruments Backed by Bitcoin

The Treasury could issue a new class of bonds or notes tied to Bitcoin holdings, using proceeds from their sale to acquire more Bitcoin. If structured so that the Bitcoin acquired matches the liability of the instrument, this could be budget-neutral, with market demand driving the process rather than taxpayer funds.

2 - Repurposing Existing Federal Revenue Streams

The Treasury could redirect a small fraction of specific revenue sources—such as tariffs, fines, or fees collected by federal agencies—into a Bitcoin acquisition fund.

3 - Trading Surplus Federal Assets

The government could sell or trade underutilized federal assets—such as surplus real estate, obsolete equipment, or even portions of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (if market conditions are favorable)—and use the proceeds to buy Bitcoin. This would essentially swap one asset class for another, maintaining budget neutrality.

4 - Accepting Bitcoin as Payment for Federal Services or Obligations

Agencies could pilot programs to accept Bitcoin for certain payments (e.g., federal licenses, permits, or tax settlements), retaining the Bitcoin rather than converting it immediately to dollars. This would require no outlay of taxpayer funds, as it simply changes the form of payment received.

5 - Leveraging Public-Private Partnerships

The government could collaborate with private entities—such as crypto exchanges or mining firms—where the private sector donates or transfers Bitcoin to the government in exchange for non-monetary benefits (e.g., regulatory clarity, tax incentives already in the budget, or preferential contract considerations). This avoids direct taxpayer expenditure while acquiring Bitcoin.

6 - Mining Bitcoin with Excess Federal Energy Capacity

Federal facilities, such as dams operated by the Army Corps of Engineers or nuclear plants under the Department of Energy, often produce surplus electricity. The government could deploy Bitcoin mining rigs at these sites, using excess energy that would otherwise go unused or be sold at a loss. Operational costs could be offset by existing budgets, making the net cost zero.

Crypto submit is tomorrow. Maybe one of the points above will be proposed. If any of the above is implemented, it's permanent buy pressure.

[zoomer @zoomerfied]

[ ZOOMER ]

DAY AFTER BEST EVER INCREASE, TOTAL CRYPTO MARKET CAP SET FOR SECOND WORST DECREASE ON RECORD: MARKET

[Laura Shin @laurashin]

The fact that the Ethereum community is talking more about Vitalik’s bad joke about communism today rather than about an ETH ETF potentially offering staking yield or the EF (finally) deploying capital into DeFi is a sign of how bad sentiment is in Ethereum right now 🫤

[Zach Rynes | CLG @ChainLinkGod]

Something interesting is happening in Ethereum land where L2s are being attacked (and attacking each other) for not being sufficiently "ETH Aligned"

A bit of a shitshow, but I think there's a deeper story here about the future of ETH and L2s

Obviously, there's very clear and widely recognized concerns about ETH's value accrual and demand, notably after network revenue fell off a cliff after blobs were introduced in early 2024

The root problem is that Ethereum forfeited the most valuable part of the tech stack (MEV and congestion gas pricing) to L2s networks, while keeping the least value part of the stack (settlement and data availability)

This has resulted in a imbalanced economic situation where L2s keep the vast majority of the revenue they generate, while paying only small single digit percentages (sometimes as low as 1%) of their revenue to Ethereum for settlement and DA

This is why the social layer for Ethereum has gotten so loud about trying to force the "ETH is money" and "L2s expand access to ETH" narratives, because revenue doesn't matter as much when you're trying to go after monetary premium story like BTC

But this economic situation has also created friction within the Ethereum community when it comes to L2s

--

In @VitalikButerin's recent blog on scaling, he made the following suggestion:

"Encourage L2s supporting ETH with some percentage of fees. This could be done through burning a portion of fees, permanently staking them and donating proceeds to Ethereum ecosystem public goods, or a number of other formulas."

Interesting thing here is that there is nothing technical proposed that would enforce this alignment, but rather it is a kind of social layer pressure on L2s, which Ethereum community has taken and run with

Rather than adjust the actual economics, people can just throw the problem back over the fence to the L2s to solve

And the brilliant this is, if they don't, then they're not properly "ETH Aligned" and must be called out, which means I'm helping saving ETH

Now we have the major L2 ecosystems all bickering with each other on the timeline about who is the "most ETH aligned", who holds the most ETH onchain, who is alleging dumping too of much of their ETH, etc

But ultimately, this whole concept is a red herring, it's not the responsibility of L2s to fix ETH's value accrual problem

It is not the fault of the L2 that it only has to pay a small fraction of its net revenue to Ethereum L1 because Ethereum decided to forfeit the most value part of the stack to L2s

It is not the responsibility of L2 to burn their own ETH revenue or stake / baghold a bunch of ETH to fix the imbalance

L2 rollups are a business and they're going to optimize their business for revenue and growth, and that's okay

The question of ETH's economic issues can't be solved through social layer pressure alone, you can't just ask L2s to share the revenue nicely, when it is not in their own economic interests to do so

--

This economic imbalance will only be made more clear once the question of "gas abstraction" really takes hold and L2s start to accept other tokens (like stablecoins) beyond ETH as an accepted native form of payment for tx gas fees

Any L2 saying or trying to do this today would be hearsay, "That's Not ETH Aligned!!1!" as it would appear to diminish the role of ETH as a gas token across L2s (still seen as a core pillar of ETH demand)

But it only takes one major L2 to accept stablecoins as a native form of payment for tx gas fees, and the others will have to step in line in order to not get outcompeted as this is a 10x improvement in UX for normie users

And I'm not talking about a work-around like Paymasters that have basically no adoption, but the L2 network itself accepting USDC as gas fee payment and converting single digit percentages of that to pay for L1 settlement + DA in ETH, while keeping the rest in USDC

Alt L1 networks will likely never accept other forms of gas tx payment natively as it would undermine their own gas token's utility and their VC investors would crucify them, but L2s don't need to issue their own gas tokens, they can really accept anything

--

The solution (at least partially) seems obvious:

1) we need to actually prioritize scaling the L1 (real gas limit increases + accelerate EVM optimizations + rapid blobspace expansions)

2) we need accelerate the creation of native rollups and make them a first class citizen in the L1 so the L1 can once again collect MEV + congestion gas pricing revenue, even if this might alienate some general purpose L2s

3) we need to start the convo of what the 'nationalization' of third party rollups into becoming native rollups would look like (not forcing it, but open the path to it being possible)

Start to go down this path and I believe a lot more people still start to feel much more comfortable the future of ETH's economics

Still bullish ETH

/ramble end

[Tomas @TomasOnMarkets]

⬆️ The business cycle is turning up - and this could be very good news for risk assets

There's currently a lot of uncertainty and fear about tariffs.

But underlying this is a very strong fundamental outlook for risk assets.

The business cycle is improving - here's what that means...

PMI looking good

The US manufacturing business cycle is finally showing concrete signs of turning up.

Yesterday we learnt that the ISM Manufacturing PMI rose above 50 to its highest level in more than two years.

This is signaling economic expansion for the manufacturing sector.

It can be argued that this uptick in manufacturing could potentially be a result of companies pushing orders forward to avoid any potential tariffs.

We will only know for sure whether this is the real deal after a couple more prints of "above 50" for the PMI.

However, from my point view, I think most business cycle indicators are signaling that we are in the early to mid stages of an expansion.

Forward-looking indicators are, for the most part, signaling that PMI should continue to generally push higher over the coming months.

So what does this mean for risk asset markets?

The S&P 500 12 month percentage change (🔴) has a very tight correlation to PMI (⚪️).

US stocks generally do well when PMI is above 50.

And you will generally find that, as the business cycle picks up steam and tilts higher above 50 (into expansion), "riskier" risk assets will tend to also outperform.

This is because strong economic growth, strong corporate earnings and low probability of recession allows investors to "move out along the risk curve".

Here's bitcoin 12 month percentage change relative to PMI:

This chart is almost comically clear - bitcoin historically performs very well when the PMI is above 50, and generally performs better and better the higher PMI rises.

Bitcoin "cycle tops" are often found very close to peaks in PMI.

But the S&P 500 is so far ahead of the business cycle - is this time different?

You'll notice that the S&P 500 appears to have "gotten ahead of itself" currently in relation to the business cycle.

So, has this happened before?

Yes - a few times.

But there are two previous examples in particular that look similar to the current set-up.

The most recent occasion was the mid 1990s.

In terms of dates, we would currently be somewhere between April and August 1996.

This was the early stages of the internet bubble - and the S&P 500 went on to charge higher almost unabated for four more years before the dot com bust started in 2000.

Could we be repeating something similar, but replacing the internet with AI?

But there is another previous situation that looks somewhat similar to the current set-up.

That was around 1989/1990.

Back then, the S&P 500 raced ahead of the business cycle, but then rolled over as the US sank into a (fairly mild) recession in late 1990.

In this scenario, we would currently be around early 1990, several months before a "garden variety bear market" 20% fall in the S&P 500 in the second-half of 1990.

[Alexander Grieve @AlexanderGrieve]

🔥SEC Commissioner @HesterPeirce announces the initial list of priorities the SEC Crypto Task Force will tackle:

-security/commodity status
-scoping out: identify areas outside the SEC's purview, and define them as such (no-action letters, etc)
-token offerings: (potentially issuance safe harbor)
-registered offerings (should issuers wish to register or take advantage of Reg A or Reg Crowdfunding)
-SPBD (noting the current version is dumb, and in need of updates)
-custody for investment advisors: appropriate custody regime for RIAs (unlike the "safeguarding rule" from years past)
-clearing agencies & transfer agents: intersection of crypto and tradfi institutions like DTCC -- how do we rework tradfi to run on crypto rails?
-cross-border sandbox: facilitating cross-border experimentation

Surreal to see. complete 180.

[Benoit Dubosson @beniduboss]

Over the last 12h:

1. MM pulled liq on Coinbase

2. All the other bucket shops that fake their orderbook depth pulled theirs as well since they just copy coinbase/binance liq

3. Mega Panik

4. Someone def blew up on Deribit on the eth contracts, further pushing prices down

5. Real liquidation data is likely closer to 10 Billion dollars than whatever is reported and Bybit announces that real liquidation data is coming back (fuck yeah)

6. One mfer market sold almost 1000btc on finex losing 7 figs in slippage 8h after the nuke

Market is healing gentlemen, reminds me of the good old times

[marty @Sellingvol]

RIP to the ETH options MM, we send our regards

[Ben Zhou @benbybit]

I am afraid that today real total liquidation is a lot more than $2B, by my estimation it should be at least around $8-10b. FYI, Bybit 24hr liquidation alone was $2.1B, As you can see in below screenshot, Bybit 24hr liquidations recorded on Coinglass was around $333m, however, this is not all of the liquidations. We have api limitation on how much feeds are pushed out per second. From my observation, other exchanges also practice the same to limit liquidation data. Moving forward, Bybit will start to PUSH all liquidation data. We believe in transparency.