与「Without_U」相关的搜索结果

A lot of testnet trading platforms feel more like demos than products users actually return to. That’s part of why @perx_trade stands out inside the @NomismaNetwork ecosystem. The platform offers a smooth way to explore trading, test strategies, compete with others, and earn Diamonds through ongoing activity all without using real capital. What makes it more interesting is how naturally the competition and engagement seem to keep users coming back. As Season 3 continues, PerX feels less like a simple task and more like one of the main places where community activity is actually happening.

It is with a heavy heart that we announce we are winding down the Botanix network. This decision is the hardest one we have made in four years, and we want to share the reasoning openly because the people who backed us, built with us, and used what we shipped deserve more than a quiet shutdown notice. First off, an immediate practical consideration for the Botanix community: please withdraw your Bitcoin and other assets before July 9th, 2026. When we started in 2022, the pitch was simple enough to say in a sentence: bring real utility to Bitcoin. What that actually meant in practice, and what we have spent nearly four years building toward, was more ambitious than that sentence made it sound. We were trying to build a Bitcoin-based blockchain that could find genuine product-market fit as a platform for Bitcoin applications, without using token incentives to drive growth, manufacture users, or simulate utility. Almost every chain that has launched in the last cycle has reached for the same playbook (issue a token without PMF, engineer the incentive surface, point at the resulting metrics), and we did not believe this route is a viable strategy in the long term. We wanted to know whether a Bitcoin chain could earn its users on the strength of what was built on top of it, the value it brings in the market with Bitcoin itself as the only meaningful economic primitive in the system. And we built it. The Spiderchain went live and stayed live, a year of mainnet operation with one hundred percent uptime and zero security incidents on a genuinely novel cryptographic architecture. We built Dynafed, a dynamic federation that turned the Spiderchain from a static multisig set into a rotating, decentralized one, the technical milestone that most people in this space said could not be built on Bitcoin without compromising trust assumptions. Twenty-five million transactions, two hundred thousand wallets, and tens of millions of dollars in assets moved across the chain, every single number of that earned organically without a token, without airdrops, without points programs, or any of the manufactured-demand machinery. Chainlink, Morpho, GMX, Dolomite, Fireblocks, Alchemy, Galaxy, OKX Wallet, all integrated. We shipped a Bitcoin neobank with BINK on iOS and Android, with self-custodial email login for Bitcoin (something that had never existed before), native Bitcoin yield, and the lowest borrowing rates against Bitcoin anywhere in the world, all of it downstream of owning the infrastructure. The point of saying this is not to argue with our own conclusion. The protocol works, the product works, and our team and ecosystem worked in concert to do exceptional work. We have run this experiment in earnest, with a working protocol, real applications, and a serious team, for over a year on mainnet and nearly four years in total. The honest answer we have arrived at, after living inside it every day, is that it did not work, at least not in this market and not on this timeline. We want to share what we think we learned, with the caveat that some of this is conviction and some of this is still suspicion, and we would rather be transparent about the difference than pretend to have clarity we do not have. The first thing I've had to sit with is timing. Bitcoin utility, making Bitcoin programmable, productive, and integrated into real financial activity, isn't where the real world users sit right now. The conversation is still on Bitcoin as a reserve asset, on its monetary and political positioning, on base-layer conservatism. Those questions are upstream of the ones a Bitcoin L2 needs people to be asking. I still believe Bitcoin gets there, but belief in the destination is not the same as being able to predict when, and nobody can. It's also possible the destination never materialises at all, and that Bitcoin's role as a reserve asset is simply where it settles. If that's true, there will never be a market for what we were building, and no amount of time or capital would change that. The second is the token question. We intended to eventually launch a token. We saw it, and still see it, as a genuinely new form of equity, something closer to an IPO than an airdrop, to be done when you reach product market fit and the moment is right. That moment never came. What became clear over the last year is that the market largely stopped rewarding even the more considered versions of that playbook. Token launches across the board have broadly underperformed, and those that did go to market with tokens haven't seen the outcomes or PMF that the model is supposed to produce. The third lesson is about where DeFi demand on Bitcoin actually lives. For most use cases that exist today, lending, yield, leveraged exposure, WBTC on a mature general-purpose L2 is genuinely sufficient. Users have voted with their behaviour, and the verdict is that the trust assumptions of a wrapped representation on Ethereum are acceptable to almost everyone who wants Bitcoin-denominated DeFi. Decentralisation matters to people in principle and in conversation; in practice, when something cheaper and easier is in front of them, they use it. The security case for a dedicated Bitcoin L2 is real, but it only matters for a narrower band of applications than our thesis required, one of the clearer lessons this market has taught us. The fourth lesson is structural. The on-chain economy is consolidating around venues that own the user relationship: Hyperliquid, Robinhood, the major CEXes, and now TradFi participants absorbing an ever-larger share of attention, flow, and revenue. Convenience and institutional credibility win, every time, as soon as they're available. As retail participation thins, that concentration only deepens. We were, and still are, believers in decentralisation, but the current direction of on-chain growth is running through distribution, and any team building base-layer infrastructure today is rowing upstream against that current. We were no exception. The fifth lesson is the most concrete. Both of the above played out directly in our economics. The users we attracted were primarily using Bitcoin as a store of value for yield, a legitimate use case, but not the high-frequency transaction volume that drives fee revenue on a network like ours. BINK was our answer to that: a Bitcoin neobank designed to bring daily usage of BTC and stablecoins on-chain, driving the transaction volume the network needed. It was the right strategic instinct, and one we never got the chance to fully test. BINK only landed on both app stores in the last few weeks, a product that by its nature could only be built once the underlying infrastructure was proven and live. When users choose the convenient option and economic gravity pulls toward distribution, what's left on a decentralised infrastructure layer is a user base that costs more to serve than it generates. Infrastructure costs are what they are, and the fee income never came close to covering them. If you would like to see how we were imagining a Bitcoin future and what we have been working on since September, feel free to download BINK and give it a spin: it’s a full-fledged self-custodial Bitcoin Neobank with email login, one click borrowing, a Lightning integration and more. App store: Play store: This UX is where we think Bitcoin is ultimately heading towards although it feels too early. You can use invite code 1SD31R, but remember to remove your funds by July 9th. We could keep going. We have chosen not to, however, because continuing past the point where additional time stops producing additional learning is not conviction, it is something that looks like conviction from the outside while corroding into something else on the inside. We would rather stop now, with integrity intact and resources available to take care of the people who took a chance on us, than push the experiment past the point where it still has something to teach us. Reminder: Please withdraw all your assets by July 9th. After this, the federation will sweep the remaining Bitcoin. Any other assets or tokens on the network from then onwards will unfortunately be unrecoverable. After this, the federation will sweep the remaining Bitcoin. Any other assets or tokens on the network from then onwards will unfortunately be unrecoverable. To our investors, who backed a thesis that was harder to defend than it should have been, to our partners who built alongside us and bet pieces of their own roadmaps on ours, to the developers who deployed on Spiderchain, to our users and the BINK community who showed up for something experimental and stayed, and most of all to the Botanix team who shipped a genuinely novel system with rigour and care and who made every hard day worth the difficulty: Thank you, more than the words available here can carry.

Vitalik shared his perspective on where @ethereumfndn is heading. Here is mine, another part of the same story. The EF Mandate from the board was something I proposed late last year. Two main things prompted me. First, debates that were meant to be technical had started to become political and personal, and at times shaped by quieter incentives. Second, as EF grew, more and more versions of "what EF should be" began pulling at the core of the organization from every direction at once. I became convinced that trying to satisfy all of them would leave us achieving nothing at all. It was time for us to restate our role and underlying principles clearly, both the parts that have been clear from the start and those that have been informed by over a decade of experience. We have said it many times: EF is one of many nodes in Ethereum. I know that is hard to hear for some, because EF was the first group, and in the early years it was essential for making things happen. But it was never meant to stay that way. I have been in crypto since 2012, before it became an "industry." I joined Kraken in 2013, shortly before the implosion of Mt. Gox, which I helped to clean up. I am very aware of how real growth works, and also aware of the real risks of centralization. So when I became ED in 2018, I understood that Ethereum growing beyond EF would be essential to fulfill its real promise as a public blockchain. The goal I set for myself was to ensure that this happens. The opposite path has always been untenable: Ethereum's future is too big for any single organization to bring about. So EF made deliberate choices to distribute power. We did incubate and release, like Uniswap and ENS. Support to seed a new norm, like ETHGlobal and the hackathons that are now everywhere. Funding the funders, like Gitcoin and Moloch. We always asked the same question: how does this stand on its own, without us? Those experiments, alongside the work of countless others, contributed to where we are today. Ethereum is now far bigger than anything EF could coordinate alone. EF now holds less than 0.2% of all ETH, and the return on all of that shared work, together with extraordinary people across the ecosystem, has been beyond anything we could have built by ourselves. That is exactly why a focused EF is possible now. The Mandate states simply the one thing EF must keep carrying: preserving and accelerating the properties and goals that keep Ethereum uniquely valuable, competitive, and worth building on. That is: CROPS - for the sake of inalienable user self-sovereignty and self-sovereign coordination. We cannot do it alone, and we do not intend to. But defining this as the north star for the mission, and coordinating with the allies who share it, is the responsibility we are keeping. None of this means EF stops caring about adoption, for everyday users or for institutions. The opposite is true: everything we do is ultimately for the people who use Ethereum. Supporting adoption, including institutional adoption, remains part of our work, pursued in the ways that fit our mission. The value proposition of Ethereum for both everyday users and institutions rests heavily on this. As EF becomes more focused and more opinionated, the team naturally becomes smaller and more concentrated. That is part of the choice. New leaders are already stepping into this mission and growing within it, and you will hear more from our management in the coming weeks, about what they are doing, and about the new structure and strategy taking shape. The mission we carry is not a smaller one, but a clearer one. Special thanks to those who have stepped in to support, defend and advance it.

Yesterday, our industry witnessed something unprecedented. In the past, when a CEX faced negative news, users could still freely move their assets to another platform. But this time, many users discovered something alarming: They were not unable to leave HTX — they suddenly had nowhere to go. Following the UK sanctions-related concerns around HTX, some third-party risk-control systems broadly labeled wallets interacting with HTX as “high risk.” As a result, many normal users experienced: restricted transfers, blocked transactions, and in some extreme cases, frozen accounts on other platforms simply for depositing funds from HTX. This level of large-scale, indiscriminate risk control against ordinary users is unprecedented in crypto history. What makes this even more troubling is: HTX itself is operating normally. Trading, deposits, withdrawals, and OTC services are all functioning as usual. But somehow, the users became the problem. And that is something the entire industry should reflect on. Because the people being affected are not “HTX users” alone. They also trade on Binance, OKX, Bybit, Coinbase, and many others. They belong to the crypto industry as a whole. If concerns exist around a platform, then measures should target the platform itself — not ordinary users through broad collateral damage. At the moment, HTX withdrawals remain fully operational. Users can still move assets on-chain. But if users eventually feel safer keeping funds only on-chain, or exiting entirely through OTC markets, then this is no longer an HTX issue. It becomes a crisis of trust for all centralized exchanges. And in a market already struggling with weak confidence, this could cause lasting damage to the entire industry. To put it simply: Crypto can survive without HTX. But crypto cannot survive without user trust. We want to clearly state: HTX fully supports compliance efforts and is actively cooperating with all relevant parties to resolve misunderstandings as quickly as possible. We respect the need for exchanges to follow compliance requirements. But we also believe ordinary users should not become victims of flawed or overly broad risk-control systems. Therefore, we sincerely call on all exchanges and industry partners to: 1️⃣ Work together with third-party security and compliance providers to address the current situation affecting users, and improve industry-wide risk-control standards. 2️⃣ Implement more precise review mechanisms for normal users interacting with HTX, so legitimate funds and users are not unfairly impacted. HTX is fully willing to cooperate throughout this process. Finally, to everyone who still trusts HTX and continues to keep assets on our platform: Thank you. HTX will not run away. We will stay here, face the situation directly, and continue working until these issues are fully resolved.

Microsoft has clarified what will happen to Windows 11 PCs that do not receive the upcoming Secure Boot certificate updates before the June 2026 deadline. The issue centers on Secure Boot certificates introduced in 2011, set to expire in June 2026. These verify that Windows boots using trusted software and protect against low-level malware such as bootkits. According to Microsoft, PCs that ignore the update could face: - Reduced protection against boot-level malware and unauthorized bootloaders - Inability to receive future Secure Boot revocation updates - Potential failures when installing future Windows feature updates - Boot errors or recovery screens after future firmware or security changes - Compatibility issues with newer Windows boot components Many systems will continue to boot normally after June 2026, so users should not expect sudden unusability. However, unsupported or older devices without updated certificates are most vulnerable. Microsoft recommends keeping Windows Update enabled, ensuring Secure Boot is on in UEFI/BIOS settings, and installing firmware updates from the PC manufacturer. Via: windowslatest

Growing up in China, then moving to the States, I get asked about Superapps constantly by international friends. It sounds grand and obvious. My answer is always the same: it's not that easy! Every superapp starts as one genuinely indispensable app. Let’s use WeChat as an example: 2011: Messaging (core chat) 2012: Moments (social timeline) 2013: WeChat Pay (payments) 2014: Red Packets (红包), arguably the single most important product moment in WeChat's history. Launched during Chinese New Year, it went viral overnight and onboarded hundreds of millions of users onto WeChat Pay in weeks. Tencent later called it a "Pearl Harbor attack" on Alibaba's Alipay dominance. 2015: WeChat Pay expanded into offline retail broadly. 2016: Enterprise WeChat 2017: Mini Programs, which allowed third-party apps to run natively inside WeChat without users downloading anything. 2020: Channels (short video, direct response to Douyin/TikTok's dominance.) 2022+: Deeper Channels integration, live commerce, search ambitions It's the heaviest app on my phone and i'm forever grateful that it exists so i can send silly photos to my parents when I was roaming around the world. Never forget that building the initial core product sets the foundation for everything that comes after

Microsoft has launched Cloud-Initiated Driver Recovery (CIDR), a new feature that automatically rolls back faulty drivers delivered through Windows Update. The system lets Microsoft remotely restore a previously stable driver version on affected PCs without user action or hardware manufacturer support. It uses existing Windows Update infrastructure to quickly resolve issues from bad driver updates and reduce downtime. The capability is currently in validation testing and will fully integrate with the Hardware Dev Center publishing process starting in September.

🚨SlowMist TI Alert🚨 💸 @Aurellion_Labs Loss: 455,003 USDC (~$455,003) 🔍 Root Cause: Unprotected initialize(address varg0) in SafeOwnable Facet. Diamond set owner via non-initialize path without updating _initialized version slot (bytes 0-7 of 0xf0c57e...) from 0, allowing re-init by attacker to overwrite owner, call diamondCut to inject malicious facet with pullERC20, and drain approved USDC. 📌 Victim Contract: 0x0adc63e71b035d5c7fdb1b4593999fa1f296f1b2 📌 Vulnerable Facet: 0x3ca79c1cf29b8d19f7c643bb6e6bc9c49762e70f 📌 Attacker EOA: 0x9f49591a3bf95b49cd8d9477b4481ce9da68d5ca Attacker seized Diamond ownership and drained USDC from approved victims including 0x2e933518..., 0xa90714a1..., 0xeced2d37.... Powered by #SlowMist#.AI

Microsoft is working on a new feature for Windows 11 that will make apps open faster and everyday tasks feel much quicker. The feature, called Low Latency Profile, gives the CPU a short burst of full power when you start an app or click on things like the Start menu, pop-up windows, or right-click menus. These quick boosts will cut down on waiting time without using much extra battery or making the computer hotter. This is part of a bigger Microsoft plan called “Windows K2” to fix common complaints about speed and smoothness in Windows 11. The feature is still in early internal tests so it has not reached regular users yet and could change before release. Most of people find Windows 11 slow and clunky so maybe microsoft finally will fix the OS