Seeing this, I feel a bit like politely criticizing it. It's not wrong, but it's quite different from my understanding 👉 The most problematic thing is, is the transmission of counterfeit to BTC? BTC is now the capital pool of the US stock market, a commodity, and what kind of imitations can determine BTC's liquidity The data of BTCDOM is very clear, and the knockoff has no right to influence a global asset with greater liquidity than itself 👉 Does the depletion of liquidity on the chain affect shanzhai? In terms of historical performance, in the second half of last year, the liquidity of shanzhai first dried up, and the on chain gradually began to prosper The most basic logic is: -The liquidity required for small coins on zippers is much lower than that of knockoffs -Shanzhai Village no longer makes money from Shanzhai Village, gradually turning to on chain management at lower costs and even directly creating new assets -The cost of creating new assets is extremely low, far lower than the commonly existing exchange knockoffs in the market From these points of view, the depletion of counterfeit liquidity has been transmitted to the chain, and the underlying problem is the comprehensive avalanche caused by the overall liquidity depletion I think the transmission chain should be that BTC breaks out of the three realms, and there is mutual attraction between shanzhai and on chain, which is more in line with the historical backtesting situation At the same time, in the future, it will be unified as on chain knockoffs, gradually losing the independent concept of exchange knockoffs. Currently, there is clearly a trend towards it The main reason I want to criticize you is that taking a careful sip seems to be different from what I thought. Usually, your copywriting is good, and I almost believed it when I read it