We've closed our first set of OTC Sales as part of the UMBRA-003 Proposal.
Excited to welcome Theia as our anchor investor & @Cryptopathic as our first angel!
This has been surprisingly resilient during this drop.
Last time $avici traded to a big low the holder count dropped by over 1000.
Did about the same this time from $5.
It seems like we are close to seller exhaustion considering this is still holding 1.50's after setting a low just under $1.20
Basically went down 85% off the high into the initial impulse of the entire move back in November.
Based on last monthly update just checked and this is tracking.
~30% more spend, ~30% more credit, ~23% more transactions, and prob around 50% growth in virtual accounts — all while retention held around 71%.
About to hit $10m total spend.
Imagine multitudes across the world individually sharing their Idle compute power to provide decentralized compute equivalent to trillion dollar centralized data centers
We are all in on Zcash.
We need to scale Zcash to billions of users.
Startups can scale, but nonprofits can't.
That's why we created a new Zcash startup.
https://t.co/bAd0grWDLJ
@JupiterExchange@KeystoneWallet@mert Love all products but .How can normal people use crypto if simple security requires different firmware for Zashi and Solana etc. wallets on say Keystone etc. Need multiple hardware wallets??? Seems way too hard for real adoption?
It’s a complete fallacy to say that automation and productivity benefits the few. The only way automation can even be deployed at a profit is if it induces demand.
Remember those word problems from highschool? If you sell apples at $20 you can sell 100 bags, but at $5 you can sell 1000, what is the optimal price to sell apples at? Automation drops the cost to produce a widget and it’s most profitable to invest into automation when the price reduction induces more demand.
This is why consumer goods get automated, luxury brand goods are hand made. There is no profit in Bentley or Berkin automation and the most valuable company automates as much as possible. If you want a small run hand made custom cell phone? Check out the 1st gen @solanamobile saga.
If there is more demand it means we are delivering more goods and services to consumers. This is the actual wealth created by the economy. If you are a Marxist, you know that all wealth is the product of the workers hand setting the means of production in motion. Automation of production of teslas would lower the price of teslas and more teslas would be delivered to consumers. The wealth is the teslas. That’s the benefit.
When politicians talk about inequality, it’s not the inequality of consumer wealth. Musk uses the same iPhone as everyone else, and the sane mri machines. What they use as an example is the inequality of capital. He has more Tesla shares than anyone else. If you doubled the number of Tesla shares in existence, the world isn’t any wealthier. If you doubled the number of Tesla cars in existence, the world is objectively wealthier.
The conundrum is that there is no way to create more wealth, aka more Tesla cars, sustainably, without creating more capital inequality. Because to create more wealth we need to increase productivity. To increase productivity we need to underwrite the risk of deploying new technologies. Someone has to put up the capital to make a machine to make teslas faster. The winners and losers are power law distributed.
But this is ok. It’s great even. We have the smartest people in the world competing to increase the number representing capital and the only way to do that is to create more consumer wealth.
Which leads us to the second political fallacy. Politicians say they want to redistribute wealth, but they can’t actually produce more teslas and give them away. So they can only redistribute capital. Which doesn’t create any more wealth. If the number of teslas stays the same and everyone has more capital, what happens? Think about the high school problem with apples. Everyone has more money and no one is making more apples. The price of apples goes up.
Redistribution of capital just leads to less investment in wealth creation and price inflation.
Projects raised millions & delivered almost nothing.
Why launch a token without utility, no plan & let it bleed from day one?
Imo, @MetaDAOProject fixes this broken model & it might be the future of token launches.
Here's why ownership tokens could change Solana forever:
1️⃣ The Problem MetaDAO Solves
✅ Old raises were extractive
👉 Teams raised millions
👉 Community got diluted
👉 Received zero rights
👉 No claim on assets or treasury
✅ MetaDAO introduces ownership tokens
👉 Treasury belongs to holders from day 1
👉 LLC fully controlled on-chain via futarchy
👉 Proposals only pass if markets believe
👉 They increase token value
👉 No insider allocations unless markets approve
✅ Your Benefits
👉 You’re no longer “donating to founders”
👉 You own pro-rata treasury value
👉 Full transparency on how funds are used
2️⃣ How MetaDAO Launches Work
✅ Fair Crowdfund
👉 Founder sets a raise target
👉 Everyone buys at the same price
👉 No VCs, no private discounts
✅ Token Distribution
👉 Tokens minted & distributed pro-rata
👉 ~10% tokens + ~10% USDC → liquidity
👉 Remaining 90% → DAO treasury
✅ Futarchy Governance
👉 Token holders trade PASS vs FAIL markets
👉 Markets choose whichever outcome boosts token value
👉 No governance theater or popularity contests
✅ Your Benefits
👉 Incentives aligned from day 1
👉 Guaranteed liquidity at launch
👉 Treasury fully controlled by the community
3️⃣ Why Ownership Tokens Are Mispriced
✅ Backed by real money
👉 Treasury belongs to token holders
👉 But markets still treat them like “hype coins”
✅ Simple math
👉 Raise $5M
👉 1B supply → each token backed by $0.005
👉 If it trades at $0.003 - it’s below its asset value
👉 Holders could vote to liquidate
👉 And redeem $0.005 per token
✅ Most traders ignore this
👉 Early buyers often get in below treasury value
👉 That gap = pure mispricing opportunity
4️⃣ Real Examples
✅ @AviciMoney
👉 Demand 10× over target
👉 Team capped the raise to keep entry fair
👉 Later raised $10M
👉 From VCs at full market price
👉 No insider discounts
✅ mtnCapital ($MTN)
👉 Raised $5.7M from the community
👉 Token traded near treasury value (real floor)
👉 When sentiment dropped:
👉 DAO voted to liquidate
👉 Holders received full treasury payout
✅ Next MetaDAO launch
👉 Same model
👉 No private rounds
👉 No VC discounts
👉 Treasury 100% owned by holders
5️⃣ Why This Matters for YOU
✅ Real investor protection
👉 You’re not gambling on promises
👉 You’re buying treasury-backed ownership
✅ Built-in accountability
👉 Teams must earn tokenholder support
👉 Bad proposals get rejected by markets
✅ Transparent pricing
👉 Treasury value = objective price floor
👉 Easy to know if it’s cheap or overpriced
✅ Community-first from day one
👉 No team allocations
👉 Community owns all assets
✅ Closest thing crypto has to equity
👉 With instant liquidity 👇
6️⃣ Final Thoughts
✅ The old model is dying
👉 From Community-funded
👉 To Community-owned
✅ MetaDAO is pushing that forward
👉 Fair raises
👉 No insider deals
👉 Treasury-backed tokens
👉 Governance tied to real economic outcomes
✅ The setup is simple
👉 Below treasury = buying $1 for $0.60–$0.80
👉 Above treasury = betting on future growth
✅ Ownership tokens are where
👉 Fundamentals finally matter 🔚
Starknet is unique in the amount of computation it can run onchain.
It’s no coincidence that three of the top Perp DEXs are building with us, and that Starknet hosts the most advanced fully onchain gaming ecosystem.
All while delivering true decentralization, security, and soon, privacy.
Freedom begins with privacy.
Knowledge creation, individual growth, economic growth all requires freedom from spying eyes especially of the gun wielding variety.
Essential read.