Oli.
Oli.
🍓Web3投研 🍑人工智能 🚀《干翻狗庄》系列工具作者
5Following
221followers
Feed
Feed
Within the expectations for ZEC's NU7, there is a change easily overshadowed by price news: a portion of transaction fees will enter a reserve, which will then be redistributed according to rules to help cover the network's long-term security costs.
The Zcash Foundation explains that under the proposed mechanism, 60% of each block's transaction fees go into the reserve, 40% go to miners, and the reserve will gradually reissue funds according to rules. This cannot be simply taken as "removal from circulation" and promoted as permanent destruction. There are arrangements for redistribution later.
I think this discussion adds a layer of practical content beyond just saying the upgrade is beneficial. After block rewards gradually decrease, what will the network rely on to pay for security costs? The fee reserve attempts to smooth income over time, but it still requires real transactions to generate fees; it cannot create miner income out of thin air.
Therefore, when looking at NU7, we must continue to examine user demand, fee scale, and miner incentives. No matter how elegant the mechanism design is, if usage does not keep up, the reserve's effectiveness will be limited. Currently, the focus is on testnet progress; it should not be prematurely written as if it has already been implemented on the mainnet.
The ETF has previously seen continuous outflows, reflecting changes in funding channels; development progress should be evaluated based on technical results. I do not accept treating the "new mechanism" as a reason to buy every time. Wait for test feedback and then look at the official implementation plan; that will be more reliable than factoring in benefits prematurely.
#ZEC现货ETF连续3日流出，NU7升级临近
Anthropic plans to go public before Thanksgiving. Beyond the timeline, a new variable emerged on October 5: Axios reported that U.S. Senator Moreno sent a letter to the company questioning its approach to warning about AI risks.
One letter is not enough to prove what regulatory outcomes the company might face, nor can it be used to judge whether the IPO will be blocked. But it reminds us that the questions this company will have to answer in the future will not be limited to whether the model works well or whether revenue growth is fast enough.
Anthropic places safety at the core of its company positioning, which can influence customer choice and will also cause it to enter public policy debates more frequently. Investors may have different expectations regarding product launch speed, government business, and compliance investment. Risks should be assessed individually, rather than giving a uniform high valuation just because it carries the AI label.
What I least want to see is people who like Claude casually treating all the company's business judgments as correct. Product users care about whether a task can be completed once, but shareholders must bear the consequences of policy changes and business arrangements. These two roles require different evidence.
The listing plan may still be adjusted and ultimately depends on the official documents. I will pay attention to how the company responds to this letter. After public debates increase, whether management can clearly explain the specific business impact is a capability worth observing before going public.
#Anthropic拟11月启动IPO，目标于感恩节前上市
NVIDIA is hitting new highs again, but I want to look at customers from a different angle. The direct buyers in the financial report are not necessarily the ones ultimately bearing the computing power expenses.
The company disclosed that in the first half of fiscal year 2027, three direct customers contributed 16%, 15%, and 13% of revenue respectively. Direct customers may be distributors, OEMs, or cloud service providers. NVIDIA also warns that indirect customers are concentrated as well, with some single customers contributing 10% or more of revenue.
On the surface, orders come from a few companies, but they may ultimately serve the same group of demands. After the customer list lengthens, it is still necessary to confirm whether the number of end users has increased. The number of invoiced entities does not answer this question.
I am not bearish on NVIDIA because of this. Concentrated procurement by major customers can also improve delivery efficiency, and strong demand currently has real revenue support. I just think that the higher the market value, the more we need to look closely at the sources of demand. If a large user adjusts their construction pace, the impact may be transmitted back simultaneously through multiple channels.
In future financial report readings, I will continue to look for explanations about indirect customers. Several channels may each have orders or may connect to the same end user, so it is not reasonable to value them as several independent demands. Customer concentration can be a scale advantage but also means the impact of a single procurement decision is greater, which deserves serious tracking.
#英伟达股价再创历史新高，市值逼近6万亿美元
The US 2025 tax filing extension deadline is approaching on October 15. For those involved in crypto transactions, it's best not to treat the received 1099-DA as a finalized profit statement.
The IRS requires brokers to report transaction proceeds starting from 2025 trades, while cost basis reporting for certain transactions begins only in 2026. This means the 2025 form you receive may only show the sale amount, and you will need to supplement the cost portion with your own records.
For example: if you bought crypto for $9,000 and later sold it for $10,000, the sale proceeds are $10,000, and the difference is $1,000. The actual taxable result depends on applicable rules and related fees. Filling the cost basis as zero directly may lead to completely incorrect tax calculations.
Cross-platform transfers are especially tricky. The selling platform knows how much you sold but may not know the original purchase price. Transfers between wallets and exchange trade records need to be matched to the same batch of assets; you cannot just look at the last withdrawal.
Also, ordinary extensions mainly extend the filing deadline but do not automatically extend the tax payment deadline; special cases like disasters and overseas situations require separate verification. This reminder is for those with US filing obligations, not all crypto holders. I think spending time organizing records now is much better than submitting an incomplete form at the deadline and regretting it.
#美2025年度延期报税10月15日截止，涉及加密申报
Besent said that the rise in U.S. Treasury yields aligns with the global trend. On this topic, I think it's necessary to separate long-term interest rates rather than lumping them all into the phrase "the Fed will continue to raise rates."
The term premium model introduced by the New York Fed divides U.S. Treasury yields into expected future short-term rates and the term premium. The latter can be understood as the extra compensation investors require for holding bonds long-term. This part is influenced by long-term uncertainty and cannot be simply explained by the outcome of the next meeting.
Therefore, even if future rate hike expectations decrease, long-term yields may not fall correspondingly. If the market still worries about long-term inflation, bond supply, or holding risks, the required compensation may continue to exist. This discussion is about the mechanism and cannot directly determine how much of the current rise comes from each factor.
For long-term financing and asset valuation, the actual discount rate used remains in place. Officials can explain why the market changes, but investors still have to face this price.
So when looking at BTC and growth stocks, don't just refresh the rate hike probability for the next meeting. Short-term expectations improving and long-term pressure not easing can happen simultaneously. I am cautious about the expectation that "rate hike probability drops, so assets should rise"; the long bond market still has its own calculations to make.
#贝森特：美债收益率上升符合全球趋势
The most noteworthy thing when checking ETF fund flows this time is actually the horizontal lines in the table.
In the fully disclosed data from Farside on October 2, BTC spot ETF net inflows were about $189.9 million, while ETH net outflows were about $37.4 million. This divergence can be discussed. But as of this query, multiple funds in the October 5 row have not yet completed disclosure, so the current subtotal cannot be taken as the final market-wide result.
Especially for ETH, the subtotal is temporarily zero, which may simply mean that the main products with trading have not yet reported numbers. If the horizontal line is interpreted as zero, it’s easy to conclude that "outflows have stopped." Once subsequent data is completed, the original judgment may need to be revised entirely.
A dynamically updated table must at least clarify the date and whether the data is fully reported. The page was updated today and will also include the complete results from previous days along with the temporary subtotal for the day. To rush the first news and skip these distinctions will only lead to corrections later.
It is a fact that BTC previously resumed inflows; whether this continues should wait for the new day’s data to be completed. Current sentiment spreads too quickly, and even blank cells can be written as positive or negative signals. I’d rather judge a bit later than treat undisclosed information as a definite answer.
#BTC现货ETF重回流入，ETH资金持续流出
OKXICE plans to launch a tokenized stock trading platform. What caught my attention this time is that stock issuers can raise objections.
According to a notice disclosed by the media on October 4, the platform plans to cover 63 stock codes and adopt a 24/7 trading arrangement. The relevant rules allow issuers a 30-day objection period. The news is still in the stage of filing and regulatory condition fulfillment, so it cannot be taken as the platform having been approved or started operations.
This objection period is very interesting. In the past, when talking about stocks going on-chain, the focus was often only on how the platform mints tokens and how users buy and sell, treating listed companies as ready-made data labels. Truly entering securities regulations, whether issuers accept this trading arrangement will also affect the final list of available targets.
For users, I think it is necessary to confirm which shareholder rights are retained by the specific products, how to redeem, and how to handle tokens held after a target exits. Extended trading hours are certainly convenient, but rights and exit procedures ultimately determine whether it can be held with confidence.
The initial list has already been published and may be adjusted before going live. I am willing to see traditional trading infrastructure seriously connect with on-chain systems. For now, I will wait for issuers' feedback and the platform's final announced trading conditions.
#OKXICE向SEC申请推出代币化股票交易平台
According to media reports based on Blockworks data, Solana tokenized stocks reached a trading volume of $4.4 billion in September. This increase is worth celebrating, but I am more curious about what transaction prices ordinary users can get when the U.S. stock market is closed.
While traditional markets are closed, on-chain liquidity pools can still quote prices, which is a very concrete attraction of tokenized stocks. Asian users don’t have to wait for New York to open and can adjust their positions even when news breaks on weekends. However, during the same time period, there may be fewer people providing arbitrage and hedging, so the depth of the liquidity pool may not keep up.
The same funds circulating repeatedly also accumulate trading volume. Although the monthly turnover is large, it may still be difficult to execute trades for a specific asset at a certain moment. To judge whether the market is effective, one needs to look at how much the transaction price deviates after the order size increases, as well as the depth differences between different stocks.
Being able to sell at any time but then realizing the price is very poor is a disappointing experience. I support 24/7 trading and also hope the platform seriously maintains liquidity during market off-hours.
If the platform can publicly disclose the spreads, slippage, and executable sizes during off-hours, then this $4.4 billion figure would be more convincing. The impressive total volume is already there, but I also want to see how a specific order is completed.
#Solana代币化股票9月交易量突破44亿美元
OPEC+ seven countries have decided to maintain the November production policy unchanged, which at first glance looks like no new changes in supply. But the Strait of Hormuz remains blocked, and there may be a long distance between the paper quota and actual delivery.
The quota tells us how much production is allowed, but export capacity determines whether this oil can be delivered to buyers. When the shipping lanes are restricted, transportation and storage may force oil-producing countries to reduce actual production, even though the paper targets remain unchanged.
The situations of different oil-producing countries are also different. Suppliers relying on the Gulf shipping lanes and those mainly using other export routes face very different pressures from the same OPEC+ statement. Focusing only on total volume misses the process of buyers seeking alternative sources.
I don’t like seeing “maintaining production” announced as supply stability. Refineries need to receive crude oil, shipowners need to be willing to transport it, and insurance and settlement must also be feasible. Any slow recovery in any of these areas will affect delivery times and costs.
To judge supply relief, at least actual loading and port arrivals should improve. Production meetings can be held according to the calendar, but transportation recovery is not so obedient. It’s still too early to rush to put an end to oil price risks.
#霍尔木兹仍未开放，OPEC+维持11月产量不变
The Federal Reserve's September rate hike vote was 12 to 0. The numbers are very neat, but I don't intend to use this directly to predict October.
Those who agreed with this action could completely diverge next. Some believe one hike is enough and then wait to see the effect; others see it as the start of a new round of tightening. The resolution compresses these differences into one result, and the minutes might let us see the discussion process.
So for these minutes, what I want to find is the officials' disagreement on the duration of policy maintenance. Supporting a brief additional hike versus supporting keeping rates high for a long time has very different effects on asset valuations. The market can price in one rate hike in advance, but may not have priced in a scenario where financing costs remain high for a long time.
Another reading detail: the "participants" in the minutes and the official voting members are not the same group. You can't see "several participants support" and then count that as votes for the next meeting.
I'm a bit tired of cutting central bank discussions into "hawks won" score reports. The voting result confirms what has been done; the subsequent path depends on reasons, conditions, and how long each is willing to wait. Rushing to grab direction before finishing the main text likely just means being swayed by the loudest statement.
#本周美联储将公布9月会议纪要