The shamelessness of ZK and L0 reflects the UGLY FACE of the entire VC system and even the blockchain industry.
I give you face, but you are shameless. I will turn against you, and you are really ashamed.
This sentence is directed to the ZK project team, which is a bit insulting.
Although I made a great prediction three months ago about ZK airdrop, don’t have any illusions.
Although I disclosed to you 8 months ago that ZK is a rogue project.
But I have never seen such a shameless project owner. They blatantly set up "radish airdrop" rules for their own insider trading, but those who meet the conditions may not get coins, and those who do not meet the conditions are said to have received coins. They also claim that "all interpretation rights belong to this project owner". When the community is in a haze, the project owner is sunny and bright every day? !
Do you think your mother started the project? Alex said, yes, it was his mother who started it. But the community is everything!
I feel like I've heard this before, People is notion, notion is people? WTF? No wonder it's called ZK nation, case solved, looks like you've learned well.
Yes, this is the main point of this article: the decentralized world should be an ideal paradise of rule of law, transparency and equality, but it is obvious that the current VC projects are heading towards another extreme: the magical Latin America of rule by man, corruption and dictatorship.
ZKs, they are not like the 1984 version of North Korea where speech is closed, but they are like Latin America and India which will do whatever they want even if you insult them.
Why are we discussing this topic?
What's the point?
The point is, we don’t make any money!
Why not making money?
Because you can’t make money by playing around, you won’t make money now if you follow the “correct” strategy that you used to make money in the last bull market!
What is the so-called "correct" strategy?
Adopt the operating strategy of "identifying the value track, speculating on new rather than old, investing heavily, holding for the long term, and obtaining super high returns far higher than the returns of the market such as Bitcoin and Ethereum". Why is this correct? Because in the last round of bull market, the overall rise was higher, the Shanzhai coins rose much more than Bitcoin and Ethereum, the new coins rose more wildly than the old coins, and the ones with valuable fundamentals rose more steadily than MEME.
Thinking back further, why is this investment approach "correct"?
Because this corresponds to our correct understanding of the blockchain industry: when the bull market comes, there will be a sufficient capital release environment, a relaxed competition landscape in the same track, less greedy VC institutions, a free investment environment, and the proposal of subversive innovation ideas. The idealistic sentiment of technology changing the world, and the project parties who want to reap the benefits will also take the long-term view.
While buying coins is a basic operation that can make money, you can make even more money by doing other things like mining, IPOs, and so on!
Obviously, there is no always correct strategy. Only when the corresponding strategy is formulated according to the correct cognition can it be called the correct strategy.
When we replicate the "correct" strategy and fail to obtain the same results, it indicates that there is something wrong with our understanding of the industry.
What's wrong with cognition?
First, it is very likely that it is not a bull market now, or it has not reached the big bull market yet, or there is no big bull market as you think.
Over the past six months, we have been talking about how to prepare for the bull market and what stage the bull market is in now.
This is probably an illusion. Looking back at the phenomenon, a stable and skyrocketing coin is Bitcoin, and Ethereum has followed loosely, all because of favorable policies such as ETFs. Another track that has skyrocketed is the inscription ecosystem, which also benefited from Bitcoin and is considered a disruptive innovation in asset issuance in this round of bull market. Other coins have increased several times or dozens of times, but it is obviously not a general increase of several times in the value track. Moreover, the coins that have increased are all other people's coins, while the value coins have not increased, and MEME has increased first.
Experienced friends should agree with the following viewpoint: The main reason for the bull market in blockchain lies in the external environment, namely the changes in supply and demand and the water release environment after the tidal effect of the halving + interest rate cut cycle, and the competitive environment is not bad. It will not be like now, where the total market value of the currency circle has not increased much, the amount of currency has increased by 7-8 times, and no one is making trouble for those who participate in the investment. It is not like now, when investors have not made any money, are stuck today, and are summoned tomorrow.
At present, except for the halving, other external environments are not mature. Therefore, the external environment does not have the foundation for a bull market, and some aspects will not be available in the short term, such as the last round of near-zero interest rate environment, such as cutting the currency volume by 90%, not so much segmentation in the same track, and a policy environment where there is no worry about deposits and withdrawals, and no worries about issuing coins and mining.
So not only has the big bull not arrived yet, but the big bull you imagine may not appear in the next few years.
Another recognized issue is that blockchain technology will continue to move forward and convince people with its value.
We have always been fantasizing that blockchain technology is still in its early stages and its applications are a blue ocean. We need to come up with a big move and make disruptive innovation every four years.
But there is no such thing in this round, and there will be no disruptive things in the short term. There will only be some incremental progress. Incremental progress may be the improvement of infrastructure rather than reconstruction, the implementation of previous ideas rather than innovation, and the gradual accumulation of customers for applications, from 1 to 100 rather than from 0 to 1.
Therefore, this effect is not exciting enough to make people scream, and the hype effect is average. Moreover, it is fast to come up with ideas, but difficult to realize them. Now the industry technology is in a dilemma that there is no new product, and the old product is far from landing. In the past, the development of blockchain technology was just icing on the cake for hype. When the four years came, the bull market environment was there, and the public chains that were not fully tested were frozen due to code. Unfinished games can also issue coins in advance, and DAPPs without users can also open for business.
Although technology is the icing on the cake, at least the storytelling should not be too bad. So, what kind of deadlock has the development of blockchain technology reached to give birth to a bad child like ZK?
Perhaps we are at a historical stage of demonstrating "false needs".
This article does not want to talk about external issues such as the interest rate has not been lowered yet, the VC premium is serious, there is no lock-in in the secondary market for new coins, but there is a heavy lock-in in the primary market for listed coins. For more information about these, please read the "Why We Don't Make Money" series.
When there are no new products in the industry, people are still fooling around, and old products are not landing. Is it because the time has not come yet, or is it not working at all? I think most tracks have been proven to be false needs, just like the telephone yellow pages, DOS system, Hummer input method, VCD optical drive, and even PDA, which are the early 2B solutions of the Internet. They may also be eliminated like Mop, 8848, Huicong, MSN, etc. because they cannot keep up with the times. So you think ZK is a big one, but it is more likely to be a big pile.
Zhou Chu, will there be world peace if these three evils, ZK, STARKNET and MERLIN, are eliminated?
Finally, I would like to say that ZK reflects the dirty face of the VC system and even the so-called value track of the entire blockchain industry.
Of all the big and dishonest projects in the last round, the only one I can think of is bzz. Although FIL has trapped many people, it has also given enough rewards for space testing and profits to early players. The so-called demise of ICP is mainly due to the issuance of coins at the end of the bull market, and it is not the project party that cuts the leeks. The main reason why investors do not make money is themselves.
But in this round, there are rogue projects like ZK, starknet, merlin, sei, wormhole, and even L0 if nothing unexpected happens. If there is only one rogue, it would be fine, but all of them are rogue, not only are they ruthless to their financial sponsors, that is, VCs, but they also take whatever they want from their users, their bread and butter. The bottom line of those who engage in technology is not as good as that of those who engage in capital.
There is only one possibility, that the project party itself feels that this round of "bull market" is worrying?
ZK relied on the financial backers behind it to set up a stall, tricking a large number of black slaves to come and work for free, implying that there would be benefits in the future, and tricking a large number of small investors to buy 5-year options, implying that the future returns would be great.
And solemnly swear: This is a decentralized country, and power belongs to the community and the people!
However, decentralization is just a slogan. The community has no decision-making power, political participation power, or even the right to make useful suggestions on project development. It also has no right to know whether to issue airdrops, launch time, project ideas, etc. It all depends on the politicians inside the wall to keep it secret and demand the disclosure of property but never push forward.
What the hell is this called a decentralized republic? Isn’t this a central country? Of course, if the central country has a wise leader, it doesn’t matter. Although the governance structure is doomed to endless troubles, at least in a bull market, the wise leader has a clear vision for the future, a conscience bottom line, is grateful to his parents for food and clothing, and will not or rarely exploit others, so we can still make money.
If the project leader is crazy and does something particularly disgusting, such as directly exploiting the surplus value of black slaves, "Das Kapital" can be reread as a classic, and if he commits financial fraud against investors, small investors originally thought that they could make a big profit by making a small investment through labor, or at the very least they could contribute money and effort, and the project party could give them something. But now it is direct exploitation + fraud!
The current situation is that absolute power will inevitably lead to absolute corruption.
A large number of projects no longer seek win-win situations with financiers, users, and developers, but instead gamble on limited stock, take advantage of the rights ceded by all parties, and engage in fraud and corruption under the slogan of achieving a great revival of the project. It is very likely that the project owners will find that this round of bull market is no longer an unlimited resource, but with limited resources, my project may not only have no disruptive innovation ideas, but also be difficult to create ripples in the short term during the progressive application development. If I can't get it done, I can't start a business in vain, I have to get the money first.
Note that in traditional industries, there are no customers and no products to sell, so entrepreneurs can’t get rich at all. However, the Internet model has set a precedent, but it is mainly to cheat the money of the investors and improve their lives. The blockchain industry is even more cheated by both the investors and small shareholders. This industry really needs to be properly regulated! If you can do it and want to do it, but you can’t do it in the short term, what should you do?
Be shameless first and store food for the winter.
If my project team can’t make money from the market, can’t we also cheat money from investors?
I think most project owners are the former. They know they can’t make it work, so they try to get money first.
A few project owners think that they can do it well, and they just need the market to give them time. However, seeing that other project owners are so well-off, they can't help but follow suit and make some money first. Whoever trusts the project the most should start with the person they trust the most.
VC projects really have no respect for their reputation.
No matter how much you are scolded, you still have to save yourself.
Final suggestions: Therefore, in this round of bull market, I would like to give you the following suggestions for altcoins:
There are still copycat bull markets in this round of bull market, but they just need a funding environment;
Even if there is a loose waterproof environment in this round of bull market, the copycat bulls will not be too many times higher, so lower your expectations;
Don’t be superstitious about the value of copycats. This round of copycats is basically “worthless”. Don’t think that technical developers have a halo. In fact, when they are at the end of their rope, they are even more unkind than us.
Reduce the proportion of copycats, hold on to Bitcoin, and other stable income tracks, such as Bitcoin mining, blockchain games, and UNI quantification;
Don’t buy a copycat as soon as it goes online. This is the best time for the project to ship and reap the profits. Wait for the bubble to last for two or three months.
Don't have too high expectations for the copycat Si Mu. This may very well be the time when the second project party sells out and reaps the profits, or when the cheated VCs quickly sell their chips for arbitrage. Falling below the issue price will become the norm, especially when your coins are locked for more than half a year. Basically, the project party's goods will be sold in large quantities during this half year.
We no longer have the rigid mindset that copycat projects will skyrocket in a bull market and plummet in a bear market. Perhaps in the context of a so-called bull market, only projects that have actually gained customers and revenue in applications in the near future are worth investing in. We also need to continue to observe how the bear market develops. It is very likely that valuable projects will begin to have independent market conditions in a bear market.
From this point of view, when the huge profits of copycats are gone and the halo of value coins is gone, it is time to look back at the rational value return multiples. It is also an opportunity to help blockchain projects step down from the altar of changing the world, and it is also an opportunity to promote the project's governance structure to be more fair, transparent, and highly involved by the community.
I will not participate in any opaque projects in the future, because opacity means that the project owners are corrupt.
Starting from me, from now on, I will refuse to pay for garbage projects like ZK.
Even if you give it face, it still has no shame!
