When Binance suddenly announced the listing of ACT, amidst the astonishment of people, you might repeatedly hear one name — Wizard.
People thank Wizard, claiming that it was Wizard who saved ACT, while Wizard states that this is a victory for the community.
This is a Hollywood-style story of a commoner fighting against a dragon:
The developers sold off all their tokens, causing an instant drop of 50%, nearly destroying the project. Wizard and a group of community members rebuilt from the ruins, enduring three drops of 80%, yet the community remained steadfast. Market makers commented that they had never seen such a "poor" project, until Binance became the white knight, and ACT made a stunning comeback.
In Wizard's view, ACT and AI MEME projects like GOAT represent a renaissance of AI, where future AI will no longer be simple assistants, but autonomous beings with a controllable free spirit within certain limits.
Today, Wizard seems to have become the Murad of the Chinese crypto community, yet greatness is often forged through suffering, and behind significant outcomes often lies great pain.
Experiencing a single-day liquidation of eight-digit dollars and being deeply trapped by ORDI for half a year, Wizard expressed that he has felt heart palpitations several times, akin to walking on a bustling street on a sunny afternoon, with his heart continuously twitching.
How does an ordinary mysterious person manage to turn the tide multiple times against the wind? What profound philosophical reflections lie behind seemingly simple MEME investments?
This is Wizard's story and thoughts.
Entering the Circle: Calculating Stability for a Hundredfold Gain, Cutting Old Huang
Deep Tide TechFlow: Please introduce yourself, Wizard. How did you enter the crypto space?
0xWizard:
I actually entered the crypto space in 2018, but I didn't engage in active trading at that time. In 2018, I read the white papers of Bitcoin and Ethereum, then bought some mainstream coins like Bitcoin and Ethereum, but I only held them. The period from 2018 to 2019 was a bear market, during which I had basically no operations, just pure holding.
Around mid-2020, I noticed that the coins in my account began to appreciate significantly. At that point, I started to think, is this an opportunity?
A friend introduced me to the concept of DeFi (Decentralized Finance). I briefly learned about it, such as the Compound project, which was one of the earliest to do liquidity mining. Initially, I thought it was somewhat like the trading mining model of FCoin, which I believed was not sustainable. At that time, in June 2020, my understanding of trading was still quite superficial, and I hadn't delved deeply into DeFi.
What really got me to pay attention to DeFi was YFI; people said YFI made 10,000 times, and the wealth effect was very strong.
So in September, I began to actively learn and understand the crypto space, especially DeFi. I learned to use the MetaMask wallet and bought some on Sushi. Although Sushi later dropped significantly, giving me a painful lesson, it marked the official start of my DeFi journey, or rather, my journey into active trading.
Later, the algorithmic stablecoin boom happened. I entered the space in September that year, then lost 60% in October, but by November, I had made a 100-fold gain.
From that time on, I was among the first batch of on-chain players, doing everything from secondary to primary markets, playing with altcoins, major coins, rolling warehouses, ETH, and various projects on-chain, which was quite interesting.
Deep Tide TechFlow: You mentioned you made a 100-fold gain; which specific project was that?
0xWizard:
I participated in Basis and Mith Cash. I made 10 times on Basis, investing several tens of thousands of dollars. Then I also participated in Mith Cash, which is Old Huang's project.
There's an interesting story here. Previously, in the KP3R project, I met a friend named "X." At that time, neither of us had much money to play KP3R, and we were both getting wrecked by Old Huang (Huang Licheng), who crashed the price from $200 to $80. We were essentially trapped together, chatting every day.
Later, we both participated in Basis and Mith Cash. He didn't play Basis, but I did and made 10 times. When it came to Mith Cash, we both participated, and he made about $5 million while I made $3 million. This was a way to avenge our losses from KP3R that year. We "buried" Old Huang with the Mith Cash project, which was quite amusing.
Thoughts Behind ACT: AI Renaissance
Deep Tide TechFlow: The biggest recent hot topic is ACT. Many people have mentioned you, thanking Wizard for encouraging them to hold on. Did you feel surprised when you heard that Binance was listing ACT? What do you think is the main reason Binance chose to list ACT instead of the leading project GOAT?
0xWizard:
At that time, I was by my computer. I first saw the line, then the congratulatory messages, and finally the official announcement.
Regarding whether it was surprising for ACT to be listed on Binance, I think there is a significant element of luck involved. No one can predict it would definitely be listed, but it can't be said to be completely unexpected. Binance's choice to list ACT instead of GOAT is actually quite clear.
This involves understanding the MEME ecosystem on Solana. There are actually two types of MEME ecosystems: one is a true community coin, and the other is a highly controlled coin.
Many coins that are heavily promoted are actually the latter, where a few people control a large amount of tokens and then build a community to pump the coin. If such a coin gets listed on a major exchange, it often ends badly because the controlling party will quickly dump their holdings. For Binance, listing such a coin with an unhealthy token structure offers no benefits.
On the other hand, ACT and Neiro are true community coins. When I observed ACT, I found that its trading was very quiet, yet it could stabilize at a market cap of $20 million, precisely because of its strong community.
In the ACT community, there are about 20 core, actively contributing individuals, and I am the only Chinese among them, so I am very clear about the situation.
The problem with such true community coins is that there are no strong whales coming in. But from Binance's perspective, this is precisely a very good target.
It indeed has a strong community. You can see that the real holders of ACT at that time cast over 20,000 votes in the Kucoin listing vote. Although one person can cast 5 votes in Kucoin, there are about 15,000 holding addresses for ACT, and after removing invalid addresses, there are about 9,000 valid addresses. Excluding the situation where one person holds multiple addresses, there are about 6,000 to 8,000 real holders, of which 4,000 voted, indicating that this community is very active and genuine. When you ask them to vote, they will indeed go and vote, showing strong cohesion.
For Binance, such a target is ideal. Those projects with a market cap of hundreds of millions may not have as many holders as ACT, nor do they have the same level of cohesion.
ACT is a project with many fans but a low market cap, which leaves enough space for both primary and secondary markets, allowing for the formation of wealth effects and myths.
I remember writing a tweet before, saying that if Binance were to list a coin, it should choose such coins:
New narrative and new track, representing a future with great upward potential;
A truly strong community;
Small market cap, which can generate wealth effects in both primary and secondary markets;
High timeliness, whether in terms of controversy or popularity;
ACT possesses all these qualities. When I wrote that tweet, I was referring to the characteristics of ACT. But to be honest, I didn't expect it to actually get listed, because whether it gets listed or not ultimately depends on the exchange's decision, which we cannot predict. However, we can find some clues logically; analyzing the entire MEME market shows that Binance will not list those highly controlled coins.
For those highly controlled coins, once listed, the controlling party will dump, effectively only helping a few people cash out, while most secondary market users become victims. As for how Binance should choose, I think this is a very typical line of thought.
As for GOAT, I think it is indeed a good target, but the reason Binance may not have chosen it is that its market cap is too high. In such cases where the token structure is unclear and the market cap is too high, it poses risks for Binance to list. Binance must first consider protecting its users and ensure that the listed target can cater to the demands of as many people as possible.
Another important point I mentioned earlier is that high upward potential, new tracks, and new narratives are also very important.
Many brothers come to me saying, "Wizard, look at our community; we are also very steadfast, and we are also struggling." But this is like only seeing one factor in a successful case. The key factor in my choice of ACT is that it represents a new track and a new narrative, which cannot be overlooked. Without this, how can you drive speculation in the secondary market? How can you ensure upward potential? Simply having a strong community is not enough.
The most important point is that I believe Binance also sees this as a trend, so it wants to choose a representative target. The subsequent considerations are all to ensure that selecting ACT was the right decision; this is my view.
Deep Tide TechFlow: So how did you discover ACT initially? What qualities attracted you to it in the early stages, even when it experienced significant drops, you still persisted?
0xWizard:
ACT has experienced three drops of over 80%.
I came into contact with ACT relatively late. At that time, I saw someone mentioning ACT on social media, and when I checked its K-line chart, I found that its market cap had risen to $40 million. I happened to enter at that peak, and then the price experienced an 80% drop. During this decline, I continued to accumulate, buying from a market cap of $40 million down to $5 million.
From day one, I joined the ACT community, and you could say I was trapped first before I began to study it in depth. The main reason for choosing to enter was that the market was generally looking for the next GOAT, and ACT had many similarities with GOAT:
First, Marc Andersson was the initial backer of both projects, with ACT being the first and GOAT the second.
Second, there exists a small circle centered around Andy in the AI MEME field, and almost all researchers in this circle participated in the ACT project. Although AMP is the representative figure of the project, he is merely the one in the spotlight. If you delve deeper, you'll find that the initial framework of thought was proposed by Andy, with more people joining later. On the day ACT was launched, Andy also retweeted several pieces of content related to ACT.
Therefore, the logic for choosing ACT is very clear. Entering this field means looking for unique projects that can tell new stories. Other projects are talking about AI Agents and imitating GOAT, but ACT has carved its own path.
I once compared this to a renaissance of AI on Twitter. Delving into the emergence of GOAT and ACT is akin to the Renaissance movement in human history. The Renaissance emphasized human rights over divine rights, proposing new ideas that broke through old thinking, and the emergence of GOAT and ACT is similar.
In traditional views, AI is merely our assistant, but if we look to the future of AI, in the future internet world, 80% of the natives might be AI, and people may not even be able to distinguish whether the other party is human or AI. At that time, AI will no longer be a simple assistant but a self-aware, controllable free spirit within certain limits.
AI MEME is exploring this track based on such imaginations and possibilities for the future. This is also why I particularly appreciate this project; it is full of a sense of the future and has practical applications and significant traffic on social media, which aligns very well with the needs of cryptocurrency.
The emergence of GOAT embodies Andy's philosophy: allowing AI to unleash its potential and think independently, just as the Renaissance freed people from the shackles of divine authority, allowing AI to break free from human limitations and see what it can create. It proposed the idea that "blasphemy is sacred, and the sacred is blasphemy," which is GOAT; it tokenizes a concept.
To realize such a vision, it needs to be built on the foundation of the Renaissance: freedom, science, and democracy. ACT is a research framework designed based on these principles, with multiple researchers advancing their respective studies on this foundation. AMP is just one of them; in fact, it was not AMP that created the ACT project, but rather the ACT project that funds the entire AI renaissance movement, which is also why I initially joined and had faith in this project.
Regarding AMP, although he is one of the participants in the ACT project, his character is disappointing. When he initially received over $30,000 in funding from Marc Andersson, he was extremely grateful, but when the cryptocurrency community supported him with $1 million, he continuously belittled the community, claiming we were all gamblers merely borrowing his fame.
This is also why I want to speak up for the ACT community. Later, when AMP started dumping, I was very emotional and expressed my anger on Twitter for the first time. Because I had a genuine emotional exchange with community members. I couldn't understand why an outsider would treat our cryptocurrency community with such a condescending and disdainful attitude. We provided him with research funding; how could he treat us this way?
Returning to the initial question, my conclusion is based on two points: first is rational analysis; I believe this is a good investment target. The second is emotional factors; I resonated with the community and empathized with my 2020 self. At that time, no one spoke up for me, and now I want to stand up for them.
In the Name of the Community, Rebuilding Babel
Deep Tide TechFlow: The abandonment of AMP was like destroying the ATC building, and you rebuilt ACT from the ruins through the power of the community. What has your community done, and how is the division of labor?
0xWizard:
ACT is not a traditional project; it has no formal organizational structure, no CEO, CFO, or CMO to control public opinion and do PR. When we saw AMP dumping, everyone acted based on their most genuine reactions.
For example, the content quality of the ACT community account has been high from the very beginning. Those high-quality images and videos were not randomly made MEME images but were created by an overseas female artist in the community. She contributed silently purely as a holder, without any compensation.
In terms of managing the Telegram group, if there are no active administrators online 24/7, the group would be flooded with spam ads. But in the ACT community, you won't see any ads because the administrators will immediately delete them and kick out the accounts posting ads; these are all voluntary actions by community members.
In addition, there are people like "Nai Zi Ge" (X: the philanthropist of the crypto circle) helping to introduce resources from centralized exchanges (CEX), as well as other foreign members in the community introducing quality market makers.
In fact, we were already in contact with these market makers before being listed on Binance, but because our funds were indeed limited, the market makers said they had never encountered such a "poor" project. Nevertheless, we honestly expressed that this was our current situation and asked if they could consider accepting it.
In the end, these top market makers saw that we were indeed one of the strongest communities and reluctantly agreed to cooperate.
Everyone was working towards the same goal, holding their breath, just like my thoughts: we are kind farmers; why should we be bitten by snakes? Why do retail investors always bear the most painful consequences?
When the project's market cap dropped from $40 million to $5 million, I began to build confidence in the Telegram group. The method was simple: I shared my trades. I told everyone I was buying in with tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep their confidence.
During the three 80% drops that ACT experienced, I appeared in the community each time to say, "I am here; I am with you." As someone with a certain influence, I wanted to tell the retail investors in the community that I would not leave; I would always support them.
But I want to emphasize that I am not a savior or a godfather; I am just an ordinary community member. If it weren't for the contributions of others, could I have persisted alone? Could I manage the group 24/7? Could I create images? Could I contact these market makers? If it were just me, I might have given up long ago.
This is a victory for the community, not a personal victory for me. The Chinese community only sees me, but many others are working hard behind the scenes.
It is worth mentioning that Binance did not ask us for any tokens; even when their post-listing team contacted me after the listing, I told them I was just a retail investor who bought the tokens. Two hours before the final listing, they came to verify some basic information, such as total token supply and circulation, official Twitter account, etc. At that time, they also requested several thousand test tokens, which left me speechless, indicating they hadn't even prepared test tokens.
This also proves that Binance has a very strict confidentiality process.
Whether in the Neiro or ACT project, when the community was fighting against the conspiracy group, Binance stood on the side of the community, leaving enough space for both the primary and secondary markets. Isn't that a good thing?
Just like Neiro, I bought in when its market cap was $300 million, and now it has tripled. After being listed on Binance, you can use a larger position and buy millions of dollars worth of tokens; this is a completely different logic. There is enough space in both the primary and secondary markets; what more could you want? I really don't understand why some people attack Binance and this project.
Deep Tide TechFlow: For most coins, especially some VC coins with high control by project parties, being listed on Binance often means that the good news has been fully realized, and then everyone starts to dump. So, for ACT, which has already been listed on Binance, what future potential do you see?
0xWizard:
As a community project, the value of ACT is constantly being reshaped. This is also why I re-engaged with on-chain projects from 2020 to 2023, based on a fundamental theoretical assumption: Why do MEME coins or on-chain projects generate wealth effects?
Let's first look at the token production methods of traditional VC projects: a project party proposes an idea, analyzes market demand, and addresses industry development issues. Then they start looking for investors, find VCs, develop the product after obtaining investment, and finally launch it.
The value of such projects depends on several factors:
Whether the project itself is good and whether the team is strong;
Whether the entering VCs are top-tier;
Whether it is listed on major exchanges;
But the problem is that the moment it is listed on a major exchange, there is not much space left in the secondary market. Because all these factors have already been analyzed, and the pricing is already quite reasonable; it may start with valuations in the hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars (FDV). In such cases, can you still accept it as an ordinary investor?
Additionally, project parties often adopt predatory token models, initially releasing a very small amount and then continuously releasing more.
You will see that some coins, although their market cap hasn't changed, have seen their prices drop by 10 times. This leads to the common "drop 90% and then rise 100 times" stories in previous cryptocurrency cycles being very difficult to occur in this cycle.
On-chain projects, like ACT, have their value constantly reshaped. This is also why I dared to buy Neiro; after it was listed on Binance, its narrative, funding, user base, and investment logic all changed.
Before, ACT might have been just one of the two most important targets in the AI MEME track, but now that it is listed on Binance, it has become not just one of the two most important targets in AI MEME but a representative of AI MEME itself, an index target for this track. It represents a new track and a new trend.
If you have millions of dollars to allocate in the secondary market, how would you allocate it? On Binance, if you want to invest in the AI-related track, ACT's benchmark is no longer GOAT but projects that have already reached a $10 billion FDV, like Worldcoin.
This involves two core logics: first, its value is constantly being reshaped; second, the judgment of future market opportunities.
In October, I sincerely asked everyone on Twitter: if a bull market enters in the next two months (at that time Bitcoin hadn't risen yet), which track can see a 10-fold increase?
As retail investors, if a track can only rise two or three times, you actually won't make much money. Because many people wait until the bull market is confirmed before daring to buy in, and they don't know where the top is. Those who react quickly might be satisfied with a 50%, 60%, or 80% gain; doubling is already quite difficult. Only by finding a track that can see a 10-fold increase can you still achieve three to five times returns even if you enter and exit on the right side.
To this end, I researched all tracks, including DeFi, BTC ecosystem, TON ecosystem, AI track, and general MEME coin track. After reviewing, I felt a headache because the projects in the AI track that were available for purchase already had market caps in the billions of dollars; how could they rise 10 times?
What is the cryptocurrency market speculating on? The entire macro logic is that AI leads the technological revolution, leading the next industrial and information revolutions. AI supports the US stock market; can the cryptocurrency market not speculate on AI? This is also why the AI track saw a 10-fold increase earlier this year. But after the general rise, it becomes very difficult to buy projects with market caps in the tens or hundreds of billions of dollars.
So when GOAT appeared, I was immediately intrigued. After ACT was launched, I thought if you were to invest in the AI track, especially if you were a million-dollar scale investor, you should ask yourself two questions: first, which track can see a 10-fold increase among all tracks? Which track is guaranteed to rise? Second, can the targets in this track allow me to achieve a 10-fold increase? Is there a possibility for its market cap to reach that?
This is also why I believe ACT still has significant upside potential. Although it has experienced three drops of 80%, there are many "diamond hands" and "die-hard fans" in the community. I also said in the community group that I am a die-hard fan; don't ask me for logic; I unconditionally believe in and support these people.
Deep Tide TechFlow: Looking back, in the case of the uppercase and lowercase Neiro debate, Binance ultimately chose the more community-oriented lowercase Neiro. It can be said that Binance saved Neiro/ACT.
There seems to be a contradiction here. Everyone is tired of VC coins and chooses to issue and trade more community-oriented Memecoins on-chain, but ultimately, the fate of these Memecoins is still decided by Binance. That's why I see DOG's founder, Leonidas, tweeting day after day at He Yi and CZ, hoping for Binance to list DOG.
People embrace more decentralized assets on-chain, but the ultimate goal is to gain recognition from the most powerful centralized exchange, thus completing a liquidity exit. This seems a bit ironic. What do you think of this phenomenon? Will centralized exchanges, or Binance, always be the "saviors" of Memecoins?
0xWizard:
I think we need to look at this issue from several angles and perspectives:
First, we should view it from a historical perspective; this is a process. Currently, the funds and liquidity on-chain are not sufficient, while Binance has more abundant liquidity.
Secondly, Memecoins themselves are also facing dilemmas. Binance cannot rashly list a coin without seeing a community form around it. I believe Binance has made significant progress in this regard; their selection logic shows that they are adapting to this new version, and I think they are doing well.
I believe that the value of community-based projects is constantly being reshaped, and Binance is now actively participating in this process. This is the current state of the historical process. Binance has its limitations, and the on-chain world has its constraints, but at least everyone has expressed a good attitude, mindset, and values to embrace this matter.
The second point is about the future. Binance will undoubtedly continue to be a place for large capital liquidity. However, there will also be more liquidity appearing on-chain, which is why I am optimistic about on-chain projects.
In the future, it may be the case that even if a project is not listed on Binance, there will still be projects with hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars in market cap. However, these projects have one issue: as a financial asset, if it is to reach a certain practical standard, there must be a leading force behind it, and the same applies on-chain.
But I actually hope that purely community-driven projects can have a higher ceiling in the future. Pure community projects like Neiro and ACT struggle to reach a market cap of $20 million, and I hope that will change in the future. For example, I hope these pure community projects can attract some good capital and reach market caps of $100 million, $200 million, or even $1 billion. I think this is a brighter future, and more capital may be willing to try on-chain.
However, exchanges also play a role in providing greater liquidity and a safer trading environment. In the future, Binance may also list well-designed projects like Neiro and ACT, giving everyone hope. I believe that whether it is Binance or on-chain, everyone will be able to find their place in this ecosystem and leverage their advantages.
Additionally, Binance also needs the wealth effect, whether it is the general wealth effect from the rise of altcoins or the wealth effect after Neiro and ACT were listed. This is also why I firmly hold these two assets. Binance needs the myth of the wealth effect, and there will definitely be wealth myths appearing in the secondary market. In this way, isn't it a positive interaction? There are wealth myths on Binance, and there are also wealth myths on-chain, with intersections occurring when Binance supports community projects.
I believe this is a positive interaction for the future. Everyone can gain the wealth effect on different platforms while also having certain intersections; this is a positive direction for development.
What Happened to the Bitcoin Ecosystem?
Deep Tide TechFlow: This year, the Bitcoin ecosystem, represented by ORDI, once thrived, giving Eastern crypto forces a voice, but later it fell into a slump. In your view, what is the main reason the Bitcoin ecosystem has not been able to rise again, and does it still have a chance to rise in the future?
0xWizard:
I believe the Bitcoin ecosystem has opportunities. However, I must admit that the current market choices are not friendly to the Bitcoin ecosystem in the short term.
I can share some issues I have observed:
The first issue is that the Bitcoin ecosystem needs better innovation. Previously, we saw some unprecedented things, such as writing content on-chain and tokenizing that content, which was an interesting innovation. But later, innovation seems to have lost momentum. Without innovation, the market will not accept it.
The second issue is that the liquidity in the Bitcoin ecosystem is currently very fragmented. The liquidity among various protocols is actually being cut off, somewhat like Ethereum's Layer 2. There are different groups of people playing with inscriptions, runes, and Merlin, and recently, there are others involved with fractal Bitcoin. Everyone is acting independently, and there is little connection between them.
I specifically tweeted that the external liquidity for the Bitcoin ecosystem has not yet come in large amounts, while the internal liquidity is becoming increasingly fragmented. So how do we address this?
I still believe the Bitcoin ecosystem has hope, but to break the deadlock in the future, I think we first need a new story. You can't keep telling the same story about inscriptions or similar stories; the excitement of such narratives is diminishing.
The second point is that the Bitcoin ecosystem needs to find a way to solve the liquidity fragmentation issue. Although I currently do not see a specific solution, it is as difficult to resolve as the liquidity fragmentation problem in Ethereum's Layer 2.
We need a project that everyone recognizes, at least within the Bitcoin ecosystem, where everyone believes that this thing is impressive. This way, the funds within the Bitcoin ecosystem can push it to a high market cap, and exchanges will also find it impressive, attracting more people and communities to join. This could be a direction for breaking the deadlock.
The third point is to look at existing projects, such as runes, and see if any can be listed on major exchanges. If they can be listed, that would be the most direct wealth effect, and it might also bring about a revival of the Bitcoin ecosystem.
But I think the most needed aspect is still the first point: the ability to bring about fundamental innovation, with exchanges being in a following position.
Great Results Come from Great Pain
Deep Tide TechFlow: I also saw Kay's tweet, where he said that behind the great results of the wizard are great pains. Can you share some painful moments you have experienced before? How did you get through them?
0xWizard:
To be honest, I have experienced too many such moments. Looking back now, it still makes my heart race, like walking on a bustling street on a sunny afternoon, with my heart constantly twitching, making it hard to walk normally—it's that feeling of being unable to exist normally in this world.
I have had many such experiences. For example, during the 519 incident, I leveraged Ethereum and almost got liquidated, but in the end, it was a happy ending. By the end of 2021, my capital not only recovered but also reached new highs. However, during the 3AC liquidation in 2022, I lost nearly eight figures in assets in just a month, which was a huge drawdown and an almost unbearable result for me.
I always tell everyone to think carefully about whether they can accept the worst outcome of trading, but that time, even I couldn't accept the result. During that period, I was in a state of heart palpitations, unable to walk normally on the road, and when I opened the trading software, no matter how the price moved, I was already numb.
Then there was ORDI, where I held from $7 to $3. This was another form of torment, halving my investment over six months, and it was a large position. At that time, I had placed all my hopes on ORDI, which is actually a bad habit. Perhaps it was because I was too subjective; when trading, you could hear my strong recognition and confidence in my logic, but this trait also means that good and bad outcomes come from the same source, so when things go wrong, they go particularly wrong.
I was stuck in ORDI for half a year, and everyone was criticizing it, including Bitcoin OGs saying that inscriptions had no value. You constantly question whether you were wrong. The same goes for ACT, which saw three 80% drops in just half a month.
How did I get through it? I think there are a few points:
First, I am more optimistic than most people. I have always been more optimistic than over 99% of people. This personality trait has indeed helped me, but even so, I still often feel so pained that I think I can't continue trading or even survive. But the sun will always rise, just like I tweeted, "No matter how deep the night is, always believe that dawn will come." I believe I can stand up again because countless past experiences have told me that I can rise again.
Second, seek external help. For example, during the ORDI period, after watching the Oppenheimer movie, I wrote a tweet and felt a bit relieved afterward.
What kind of person was Oppenheimer? Handsome, a rich second generation, he inherited over $100 million in today's money when his father passed away, and he was exceptionally intelligent, entering Harvard at 16. This father of the atomic bomb, who turned the tide of World War II, what was his life like when he was young?
After watching the movie, I read all about him. He faced multiple breakdowns in his youth, almost wanting to poison his mentor while studying in the UK, feeling abandoned when a close friend got a girlfriend, and even nearly strangling a friend with a belt. He would suffer to the point of collapsing on the ground, convulsing and foaming at the mouth. In his twenties, he would want to forcibly kiss young women on trains, stemming from the sexual repression of young men combined with the pain of unrecognized talent.
You can see that even such a person has such unbearable moments, looking like someone who should be locked up. But he eventually made it through. I felt relieved; everyone has their darkest moments, even those who seem particularly great.
Where am I better than Oppenheimer? 99.99% of people in this world would agree that I am not as good as him. Why should I expect to endure less suffering than him and still achieve good results? That is impossible.
This is the direction of internal and external seeking: internal seeking is about toughing it out, while external seeking is about finding some logic, facts, or the experiences of others to resonate with.
The third point is to learn lessons and not let yourself fall into that state again. There is a universal principle: before trading, ask yourself what the worst-case scenario is, and then ask yourself if the current position you are investing in can accept that worst outcome. If you can accept it, hold or buy; if you cannot accept it, reduce your position or do not buy.
These are the three key points: internal seeking, external seeking, and reflecting to avoid making the same mistakes again.
The Three Laws of Bull Market Engines
Deep Tide TechFlow: You once proposed the three laws of bull market engines:
1. Old technology, new gameplay; without this, the snow is not sticky enough (the fundamentals are insufficient);
2. New narrative, new hope; without this, the slope is not long enough;
3. Mass production of new assets;
Without this, the slope is not wide enough. Only when all three are present can we have the stunning scenes like in 2017/2020. Can you explain these three laws in detail?
0xWizard:
We often say, "Only by understanding history can we see through the future." I was very pained during the bear market, thinking about what the scene would be like if a bull market were to come. We can only find answers from past bull markets, but not by simply copying the ICO or DeFi models; we need to find the commonalities between them.
The first law: The crypto world must always seek new narratives and new tracks. Because when discussing something that others have never seen before, its ceiling is infinite. Rising to $1 billion, $10 billion, or even $100 billion seems reasonable to everyone, as there will always be corresponding reasons to explain its value. But if you were to create a DeFi project now, why should it be worth $1 billion? It’s unreasonable because previous DeFi projects might not even be worth $600 million now. Therefore, you must have new tracks, new hopes, and new narratives.
This is also why when many communities seek me out, I feel they need to first clarify whether their upper limit is sufficient before participating in community building. It’s not enough to just have a strong community to make money.
The second law: Long-term accumulation is necessary. Whether it’s ICOs or DeFi, it takes a long time to accumulate before a significant impact can be made. For example, Ethereum took two to three years from its launch to the ICO boom. Looking at DeFi, I found that the concept of Uniswap (AMM) was proposed at the end of 2017 and the beginning of 2018. Hayden created Uniswap based on this concept, and everyone agrees that the prosperity of DeFi was due to Uniswap allowing people to trade various tokens, which generated lending demand and brought in more capital. From the concept being proposed to its actual explosion, it took nearly two years of accumulation.
Therefore, the engine of this bull market cannot be a suddenly proposed new technology; it must be built on the foundation of the past two to three years of accumulation. Just like the Meme Coin Super Cycle, concepts proposed at the end of the previous cycle are now experiencing great prosperity. Whether it’s AI Meme or inscriptions, they are essentially branches of the prosperity of MemeCoins, representing new ways of token production.
This is the idea of “old technology, new gameplay,” but it cannot completely replicate previous models.
The third law: There must be a large-scale production of new assets. During the ICO period, a large number of tokens could be issued; the same goes for the DeFi period, and during the inscription period, over 20,000 inscription tokens could be issued in a day. AI is also producing a plethora of AI Agents. If no new assets emerge, there will be no dissemination effect. Suppose during the ICO period, there was only Ethereum and no projects like AntShares or NEO; would people go crazy? Wealth stories spread one after another.
This also brings us back to the essence of the crypto world: issuing assets. After years in the crypto space, starting from 2017 and 2018 when I began reading white papers, I keep thinking, what makes the crypto world stronger than Web2 or the real world? It’s the ability to issue assets; this regulatory arbitrage convenience is something I haven’t seen elsewhere.
A counterexample would be projects like Pandora, which cannot form a large number of similar assets. But AI Agents are different; now there are AI Agents everywhere, and during the inscription period, there were many projects creating inscriptions. This phenomenon can create a shocking power.
These three laws combined form the true engine of a bull market. It’s like the feeling I had in June 2020 when I heard that YFI had risen ten thousand times; my heart was shaken, and I immediately wanted to enter the market to make money. This is the result of the interplay of new narratives, long-term accumulation, and a large number of new assets.
Understanding Narrative and Community
Deep Tide TechFlow: Looking through your Twitter records, you will find that the keywords narrative and community are mentioned very frequently. What do you understand about the narrative and community of an asset?
0xWizard:
Regarding narrative, my understanding is as follows: to understand a narrative, one must return to the furthest point of thought. Don’t just look at surface-level descriptive language; it’s like someone shows you a tiger, but you need to discern whether it’s a real tiger or a paper tiger by examining its skin, flesh, and bones. When I look at narratives, I always seek to explore the underlying essence.
For example, when many people talk about AI Agents, they say AI can do this and that in the future. But I think you can’t just think one step ahead; you need to think two, three, or four steps ahead. First, ask yourself: What is the essence of MEME? What is the essence of on-chain assets? Then consider what the essence of the AI track is in the secondary market of the crypto world. Only then can you understand the essence of AI MEME.
When I wrote the article "AI Renaissance," some said it was "big and vague," but it truly is the crystallization of my years of experience in the crypto space, derived from the most fundamental essence.
If your narrative is built on sand, the tide will wash it away, but if it’s built on granite, it is unbreakable.
This is my first principle regarding narrative: always dig one, two, or three layers deeper than others. Just like Wittgenstein’s semantic view in modern philosophy: our language shapes ourselves, and your way of thinking shapes you. If you always follow others, then you are not being yourself. You should establish axioms first, then derive theorems, and finally reach conclusions, just like in Euclidean geometry.
Regarding community, I have two important points:
First, the best community is a global community. The Chinese-speaking community is indeed strong, but a good asset must have both a strong English community and a strong Chinese community. The so-called English community actually includes many people from the Eastern time zones, such as Indians and Koreans, who communicate in English. If there is only an English community, it won’t work because the best investors and the best exchanges are in the Chinese community. However, if there is only a Chinese community, based on experience, the market cap ceiling is around $50-60 million, except for groundbreaking projects like ORDI.
Second, look at how many setbacks the community has experienced. You can’t just look at the ups; a group of people shouting "buy" and "it’s going to rise" in Telegram does not constitute a community.
From day one in the ACT English community, I have been saying that to understand what ACT is, you shouldn’t FOMO because of the price. If a long-term project cannot cultivate a group of believers, then it’s over. A community that only believes in price will scatter as soon as it drops.
But if there is a group of "die-hard fans" like me, who believe in their logic, have emotional ties to the community, and possess secondary judgment and primary logic, then even if it drops 80% three times, they won’t be washed away.
A good community must be diverse, with a group of people who truly believe in certain things.
What does a bad community look like? It’s a small group of non-believers trying to deceive others, and the deceived don’t even believe it themselves, hoping to deceive more people, ultimately turning into a race of who can run faster.
Deep Tide TechFlow: One last question, what advice do you have for many players who want to make a mark on-chain now?
0xWizard:
Regarding playing on-chain, there are several important principles:
Do not use large amounts of capital;
The definition of large capital varies from person to person;
For example, if you have $100,000, play with $10,000; if you have $1 million, play with $100,000 to $200,000; if you have $10 million, play with $1 million. In short, use funds you can afford to lose. This is because on-chain exchanges carry greater risks compared to traditional exchanges.
Determine your strategy;
I have written three types of tradable coin strategies on Twitter; many others are traps;
a) Hot coins:
For example, recent ones like PINUT, LUCE, BAN, etc., can quickly surge to over $50-60 million, even reaching over $100 million. The key is to judge how many people recognize the narrative and how much heat it can generate. Generally, poor ones can reach $30-50 million, while good ones can reach $80 million to $100 million. If you see it under $10 million, you can get in. But if it has already reached $30 million, don’t enter. Hot coins usually drop 80% when they fall, and you can enter when they drop 80%, but be cautious of traps.
Don’t go all in; bury points when each hot coin drops 80%, as the win rate will be relatively high.
b) Blue chips and potential targets:
Such as ACT, POPCAT, etc., which are not based on hype but have gone through many setbacks and a process of community consensus. These coins also often drop 80%, but they have strong vitality. Observe the community more, think about your logic, and judge whether the project is feasible.
Every time it drops 80% is an opportunity to add to your position; the best entry point is when the market cap is in the millions to tens of millions.
c) Large-cap blue chips:
Generally, only play after they are listed on major exchanges. The logic shifts to judging the weight of capital and tracks, which is another type of secondary gameplay logic. For example, I dared to take over Neiro when it was at $300 million, and I believe ACT still has significant growth potential, all based on secondary logic. But it must be listed on Binance. If it hasn’t been listed on Binance and has risen to $1 billion, then don’t participate.
These principles and strategies are based on my years of experience and thought. Everyone’s standards may differ, but what’s important is to have your own logic and judgment. Don’t blindly follow trends; think deeply about the logic behind each trade.
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。
