Recently, I saw a post online, which was a participant's feelings about the process of participating in the Bitcoin fractal network.

Regarding the fractal network, I have shared my general opinion in previous articles: overall, my view is quite average, so I did not participate. Therefore, I originally had no emotions about this project. However, after reading this post, I strongly felt a sense of loss and helplessness.

In this post, the author not only described the development of the fractal network in recent months, but also detailed the fluctuations of four coins: SATS, PIZZA, FB, and CAT20.

From the emotions in the post, it can be seen that the author's major concern is not so much the development of the fractal network itself, but the impact of the fluctuations of these four coins on themselves and the community.

The reason for the price fluctuations of these coins, in my opinion, is both external and internal.

The external reasons are inseparable from the overall environment's depression.

In the recent round of adjustments, even Bitcoin dropped from nearly $75,000 to less than $60,000 at its low point. In this situation, I find it hard to imagine any coin (except for purely emotion-driven MEME coins) being able to chart its own course.

Especially since these coins are all part of the Bitcoin ecosystem, they are even more affected by Bitcoin's market trends - "When the nest is overturned, how can there be intact eggs?"

In my view, the internal reasons are even more crucial.

I have shared my opinion on this point in previous articles and in online discussions:

In the absence of further application innovation in the Bitcoin ecosystem, if the goal is merely to support the large number of Ethereum imitating applications currently, the existing Bitcoin expansion facilities are already sufficient.

Avoiding the main contradiction of application innovation, repeatedly inventing so-called "new" protocols, "new" terms, and "new" assets on the basis of the infrastructure, and these so-called "new" protocols are not fundamentally better than existing protocols.

These things are not really innovative at all, they are just "reinventing the wheel." It is completely meaningless. In my view, such work is not only futile, but also harmful, as it wastes manpower, energy, and financial resources, and also consumes the community's enthusiasm.

Such futile efforts are not only useless but also harmful.

In the end, when many users realize that they have wasted their precious Bitcoin and the tokens they have obtained are ultimately just "leftovers," this will only drive more users away from this ecosystem.

This kind of development also has another consequence, which is to exacerbate the speculative sentiment among users in the community.

In the comments section of this post, there are users asking questions like "Will it be listed?" and "Will there be market manipulation?" It is evident that some users have already placed their last hopes on the project team.

Once we place our investment hopes on whether the project team will manipulate the market or take action, it is almost certain that we are treating ourselves as "cannon fodder" and the project team as "butchers."

In this situation, even if the project team does "list" or "manipulate the market," is it really to save the investors? It is probably a much more unfathomable situation, right?

At least so far, unless I come across a project that I particularly like and find unique, I am completely tired of this type of so-called "innovation" that is transparent at first glance.

I suggest that our readers pay more attention to holding onto their Bitcoin and Ethereum, and be cautious about buying projects that are not absolutely necessary or that they are overly fond of.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。