全部推文
共 6436 条 · 第 174 / 215 页 · 滚到底自动加载更多
-
谷歌太空数据中心项目利好 Planet Labs 及发射商 Rocket Lab。
谷歌($GOOGL) CEO 近日发布：Project Suncatcher 项目，计划于 2027 年在太空建立数据中心。下一代张量处理单元(TPU)将运行在太阳能卫星星座上，以扩展机器学习(ML)流程。最大的受益者是谁？Planet Labs ($PL) 以及衍生的 $RKLB 和 SpaceX。Planet Labs 是一家鲜为人知的小市值($35亿)太空公司，凭借此交易拥有巨大上行空间。Planet Labs 将为谷歌部署两颗原型卫星，目标是在 2027 年初发射。$PL 使用的发射服务商是 $RKLB（分别于 2018 年 1 月和 2020 年 10 月）和 SpaceX。其中一家（Rocket Lab）让人想起我最高确信度的多头持仓。对于 $PL 而言，收入可能在 1000 万至 4000 万美元的小范围内。但如果原型机顺利，完整的星座将带来 2.5 亿至 10 亿美元以上（且规模效应下更多）的收入。你搭上 $GOOGL 供应商列车了吗？
英文原文
Google ( $GOOGL ) CEO recently unveiled: Project Suncatcher, a project to create datacenters in space in 2027. Next generation TPUs will run on solar-powered satellite constellations to scale ML flows. The biggest beneficiary? Planet Labs ( $PL ) and by derivative $RKLB and SpaceX. Planet Labs, a lesser known, small cap $3.5B space company, has huge upside with this deal. Planet labs will deploy two prototype satellites for Google, targeting a launch by early 2027. The launch providers that $PL uses are $RKLB (January 2018 and October 2020) and SpaceX. One of which (Rocketlab) reminds one of my highest conviction longs. For $PL revenue is likely in the small $10-$40M range. But a full constellation would bring in $250 million to $1 billion+ (and more at scale) if the prototype goes well. Are you riding the $GOOGL supplier train?
-
博主要求创始人正面回应，批评回避问题行为。
@yuarecold @awxjack 创始人给出了一个简单的“是/否”回复。我不在乎 X 上随机路人有什么看法。正在等待 @awxjack 回应，否则鉴于已有许多人看到这条推文，回避问题会显得非常糟糕。
英文原文
@yuarecold @awxjack It's a simple yes/no response from the founder. I don't care what opinions randoms on X have. Waiting on @awxjack to respond, otherwise it will reflect pretty badly dodging the question seeing how many people saw it already.
-
SMCI因远期增长定价偏差适合交易，非长期投资首选。
@MajorOcelot45 对我来说，$SMCI 是一只用于交易的股票，因为其远期增长存在定价偏差，市场上有大量更好的长期投资标的。
英文原文
@MajorOcelot45 For me $SMCI is a stock to trade due to mispricing of forward growth, there’s tons of better long term investments.
-
建议优化财报板块UI细节并寻求用户合作。
反馈如下：视觉上看起来不错，但有很多细节让人解析起来很烦躁。例如，如果你在标签页上方（右侧图片）添加一个带有深色模式的概览(Overview)，会有更多人使用财报(Earnings)板块。还有无数这样的小细节决定了产品能否被广泛采用。除此之外，你应该去找 FinX 的用户合作，@AravSrinivas。
英文原文
So feedback: Visually it looks nice but there's a lot of minor details that makes it annoying to parse. Eg. a lot more people would use the earnings section if if you added an overview (image on the right) on top of the tabs with darkmode. There's endless amounts of little details like that which make or break adoption. That aside, you should go around partnering with FinX users for this @AravSrinivas.
-
质疑AirWalletX架构能否防止中国政府强制获取美客户数据
人们并不关心工程师坐在哪里或数据中心建在哪里。 关键在于，中国政府是否能够像通过 TikTok（追踪记者）那样，强制访问或为 AirWalletX 植入后门以获取美国客户数据。 用一个简单的“是/否”问题来消除疑虑： 在您当前的技术架构下，是否不可能让任何身处中国/香港的人员或实体，即使在其政府依法强制要求下，也能从您的系统中获取美国客户/商业或交易数据？
英文原文
People aren't concerned where engineers sit or where data centers are. It's that the Chinese Government is able to forcibly access / backdoor US customer data like with Tiktok (tracking journalists), on AirWalletX. Simple Yes/No Question to shut down concerns: Under your current technical architecture, would it be impossible for any person or entity in China / Hong Kong Kong, even if legally compelled by their government, to obtain U.S. customer/business or transaction data from your systems?
-
承认对方对IREN的研究，指出与NBIS估值标准化存在分歧。
@Agrippa_Inv @RJCcapital @MarkosAAIG @moninvestor @pepemoonboy @DeepValueBagger @amitisinvesting @Sandeman52 不，说真的，我相信你们为 $IREN 制作了很好的内容，并且更了解那家特定公司。我认为我们在 $NBIS 的指标标准化(normalizing figures)问题上存在分歧。
英文原文
@Agrippa_Inv @RJCcapital @MarkosAAIG @moninvestor @pepemoonboy @DeepValueBagger @amitisinvesting @Sandeman52 nope, in all seriousness, I'm sure you produce good content for $IREN and know more for that specific company. i think we just come to a disagreement when it comes to to normalizing figures vs. $NBIS lol
-
博主为粉丝制作并赠送了NBIS周边商品。
@babyfolio 也给你做了一份，$NBIS 的周边完好无损 https://t.co/ouiTGg8xJ6
英文原文
@babyfolio Also made you one too with the $NBIS merch in tact https://t.co/ouiTGg8xJ6
-
吐槽X平台算法推荐机制变差，金融类内容曝光率显著下降。
嗯，我觉得是普遍现象。即使在我的个人时间线里（我只关注金融/设计领域），也很少看到股票相关内容被推荐。 @nikitabier，我不确定这是否与诈骗者在金融博主评论区发布外部链接，从而损害了整体帖子的“为你推荐”算法有关？ 但即使在我的个人时间线里，我只关注金融领域，却发现我关注的人出现的频率越来越低。
英文原文
eh, I think it's across the board. Even in my own feed (I only follow Finance/Design), just seeing stock stuff not recommended much. @nikitabier, I don't know if it has to do with scammers posting external links underneath finx influencers in comments and hurting new For You recommendations for the overall post? But even my own feed, I only follow finance and I've been seeing the people I follow show up less and less.
-
调侃IREN研报订阅激增，预测更多博主将跟进此趋势。
@Agrippa_Inv 你现在这么说，但等你 $IREN 的 Substack 深度研究(DD)订阅人数再翻三倍后就不这么说了。 @RJCcapital 已经在利用这一趋势获利。 如果 @MarkosAAIG、@moninvestor、@pepemoonboy、@DeepValueBagger、@amitisinvesting、@Sandeman52 等人很快跟进，我也不会感到惊讶。
英文原文
@Agrippa_Inv You say that now but not after 3x more people subscribe to your $IREN substack DD. @RJCcapital is already capitalizing on this trend. Wouldn't be surprised if @MarkosAAIG, @moninvestor, @pepemoonboy, @DeepValueBagger, @amitisinvesting , @Sandeman52, & others follow soon
-
因算法变动流量下滑，博主将头像改为女孩以博眼球。
由于 Grok 算法变更更倾向于病毒式传播内容而非股票，导致金融交叉(FinX)领域的印象数下降。我别无选择，只能将我的 $RDDT 虚拟头像换成女孩。目前粉丝数为 13.2k。让我们看看年底时我的状况如何。只有老粉(OGs)才会知道 https://t.co/PtWjlBz1FL
英文原文
Due to declining impression count across the FinX sector from Grok algo changes favoring viral content over stocks. I have no choice but to change my $RDDT fictional profile picture to a girl. Currently at 13.2k followers. Lets see where I’m at the EOY Only the OGs will know https://t.co/PtWjlBz1FL
-
博主感谢早期评论者，并反思未采纳社区建议导致高位建仓。
@lesantcho9306 是的，你是早期评论 $LITE 的人之一。谢谢！ 这让我想起 @SCurveCapital 一直跟我提 $IREN 在 10 美元左右的时候。我最终在 26 美元左右才买入，而且只是小仓位，哈哈。 确实应该多听听社区的意见。
英文原文
@lesantcho9306 Yep you were one of the early commenters about $LITE. Thanks! It remind me of the time @SCurveCapital kept telling me about $IREN at $10 or something.I finally bought in at $26 or something but just small positions lol. Should listen to the community more for sure
-
对比NBIS的高增长潜力与SMCI的估值修复机会。
所以是不同的股票组合。我会这样解读： - $NBIS：高贝塔值，超高速增长，未来走向难料。潜在上行空间最大（核心业务同比增长700%，Robotaxi FSD部门等4家子公司同比增长100%+）。 例如，如果$UBER本月在德克萨斯州与Avride合作的Robotaxi（自动驾驶出租车）发布顺利并扩展至其他地区，我们可能会看到该子公司估值大幅上升。 - $SMCI：盈利，估值修复带来中等回报（仍有~30-60%的回报空间）。同比增长60%，但远期市盈率仅为11倍，像$PYPL这样的零增长股或像$MSTR这样的困境资产。 对于SMCI，更多是看数据和行业，发现错配（例如$UPWK的价值投资逻辑）。
英文原文
So different basket of stocks. How I'd frame it is: - $NBIS: high-beta, hyper growth, who knows where it goes. Highest possible upside (700% Y/Y core business, 100%+ Y/Y across 4 subsidiaries like Robotaxi FSD division). For example if $UBER Texas robotaxi launch goes well with Avride this month and they expand elsewhere, we could see the subsidiary valuation rise a lot. - $SMCI: profitable, moderate return from valuation catchup (still ~30-60% return). Growing 60% Y/Y but priced at 11 forward p/e like a no-growth stock eg. $PYPL / distressed asset like $MSTR. For SMCI it's more about looking at the numbers/sector and seeing a misalignment (eg. $UPWK value investing)
-
补充AI供应链受益股并增加AMKR持仓
@B38B37 是的，内存也是。还需要补充联发科（I/O 芯片let）、$CLS、$JBL 和 $AMKR（TPU v7 模块封装的第二供应商）作为受益者。这正好说明了供应链的规模有多大。另外，正如 @Mexicancik1 提到的，我也增加了 $AMKR 的头寸。
英文原文
@B38B37 Yeah memory is. Also needed to add MediaTek( I/o chiplet), $CLS, $JBL, and $AMKR (second source for packaging the TPU v7 modules) up there as beneficiaries. Just goes to show how large the supply chain is. Also adding positions in $AMKR as @Mexicancik1 mentioned.
-
看好$LITE因TPU放量潜力，虽追高但仍决定定投建仓。
有点遗憾我加入 $LITE 派对晚了，它现在正处于历史高点(ATH)。但如果看看 $NVDA 从2022年到现在发生了什么，如果张量处理单元(TPU)最终成为推理领域的主导力量，同样的情况也可能发生。而且，$LITE 与 TPU 的放量直接相关。遗憾的是，我此前没有意识到它对生态系统有多么关键。这是我正在通过成本平均法(Cost Averaging)建仓的标的，虽然有点晚，但很高兴将其加入我的投资组合。
英文原文
Yeah little sad I'm late to the $LITE party and it's ATHs right now. But if we look what happened to $NVDA 2022 to now, same could happen if TPU ends up becoming a dominant player in inference. and.. $LITE is directly correlated to TPU ramp up. Sadly didn't realize how vital it was to the ecosystem earlier. This is something I'm cost averaging shares with but it's a happy add to my portfolio.
-
分析Google TPU v7供应链，建仓Lumentum以博弈TPU生态扩张。
对 $GOOGL TPU v7 Ironwood 供应商的分析。 以下是受 Google TPU 建设影响最大的公司列表。 + 我正在建仓的 TPU 相关股票。 [关键] 设计/IP： - 博通 [ $AVGO ]：共同设计并实现 Google 的 TPU ASIC（专用集成电路） [关键/高] 半导体晶圆代工： - #1 台湾半导体 [ $TSM ]：TPUv7 在 TSMC 3nm 工艺制造 - #2 三星电子：次要存储及晶圆代工合作伙伴 [关键/高] 存储： - #1 SK 海力士：为 TPUv7 Ironwood 提供 HBM3E - #2 三星电子：~TPUv7 特定报告强调 SK 海力士 + 三星。 [高] 光网络： - Lumentum [ $LITE ]：Google 广泛使用光电路交换 (OCS) - Coherent [ $COHR ]：OCS 参与者但较弱 [高] 电源管理 IC： - Monolithic [ $MPWR ]：这是一个投机性观点，即 Vicor 将被 $MPWR 取代，源自财报中提及 TPU [中] 热管理： - Vertiv [ $VRT ]：Vertiv 供应作为液冷系统核心的 CDU（冷却分配单元），将冷却液泵送至 TPU 芯片的冷板 - Modine [ $MOD ]：更投机性地认为他们提供大型冷水机组和空气处理单元 (AHU) [中] 互连： - TTM Technologies [ $TTMI ]，$ANET，Unimicron，Ibiden ______ Google TPU v7 “Ironwood” 的建设代表了一个旨在打破 $NVDA GPU 垄断的平行硅生态系统的构建。 实质性影响最集中在博通（作为硅架构师和商业载体）、存储综合体（SK 海力士/三星）以及光网络/电源领域（Lumentum/Vertiv），这是基于公开证据创建的，但很大程度上取决于采用率、供应商份额和竞争反应的实际表现。 从这项供应链研究中，我正在 $LITE 建立新头寸，以防 TPU 成为推理领域的主导 ASIC。 Lumentum 是 Google 致力于 OCS 的主要受益者，并构成了 TPU 吊舱中使用的 “Apollo” OCS 交换机的核心。 TPU v7 集群的爬坡直接转化为 Lumentum 光开关模块的出货量。由于 OCS 是 Google 超大规模方法独有的定制架构，Lumentum 在此处面临的 commoditization（商品化）压力小于标准收发器市场。 然而，如果 Anthropic、Meta、Apple 和其他公司购买 $GOOGL ASIC 导致 TPU v7 规模扩大，该供应链中的所有公司都将受益。
英文原文
Analysis of the $GOOGL TPU v7 Ironwood Suppliers. Here's the list of what comapnies are the most materially impacted by the Google's TPU buildout. + the TPU stock I'm taking a position on. [Critical] Design/IP: - Broadcom [ $AVGO ]: co-designs and implements Google’s TPU ASICs [Critical/High] Semiconductor Fab: - #1 Taiwan Semi [ $TSM ]: TPUv7 is fabbed at TSMC 3nm - #2 Samsung Electronics: Secondary memory & foundry partner [Critical/High] Memory: - #1 SK Hynix: HBM3E for TPUv7 Ironwood - #2 Samsung Electronics: ~TPUv7-specific reporting emphasizes SK hynix + Samsung. [High] Optical Networking: - Lumentum [ $LITE ]: Google uses extensively uses Optical Circuit Switching (OCS) - Coherent [ $COHR ]: OCS player but weaker [High] Power Management ICs: - Monolithic [ $MPWR ]: This is speculative that Vicor will be replaced by $MPWR, from earnings mentioning TPU [Medium] Thermal Management: - Vertiv [ $VRT ]: Vertiv supplies the CDUs that act as the heart of the liquid cooling system, pumping coolant to the cold plates on the TPU chips - Modine [ $MOD ]: More speculative that they provide provides the massive chillers and air handling units (AHUs) [Medium] Interconnects: - TTM Technologies [ $TTMI ], $ANET, Unimicron, Ibiden ______ The buildout of the Google TPU v7 "Ironwood" represents the construction of a parallel silicon ecosystem designed to break the monopoly of $NVDA GPU. The material impact is most concentrated in Broadcom (as the silicon architect and commercial vehicle), the Memory Complex (SK Hynix/Samsung), and the Optical/Power sectors (Lumentum/Vertiv) and was created from public evidence but is largely dependent on adoption, vendor shares, and competitive responses actually play out. From this supply chain research, I'm initiating a new position in $LITE, in the event the TPU becomes the dominant ASIC for inference. Lumentum is primary beneficiary of Google’s commitment to OCS and form the core of the "Apollo" OCS switches used in TPU pods. The ramping of TPU v7 clusters translates directly to unit volume for Lumentum’s optical switch modules. And because OCS is a bespoke architecture unique to Google’s hyperscale approach, Lumentum faces less commoditization pressure here than in the standard transceiver market. However all companies in this supply chain are set to benefit if the TPU v7 scales up from Anthropic, Meta, Apple, and others buying the $GOOGL ASIC.
-
CoreWeave CEO称其自研软件栈是核心竞争优势。
对于 $CRWV，其CEO表示，正是其软件编排(software orchestration)能力，使他们能够将裸机(bare metal)转变为功能完备的超级计算机。CNBC上有一段5分钟的采访涉及此话题。 另一段采访： “CEO强调了CoreWeave的定制软件栈(custom-built software stack)，他认为这将在长期使公司脱颖而出。他表示：‘从我们的角度来看，我们真的相信，随着时间的推移，将我们与他人区分开来的……是驱动我们在基础设施上实现性能的……软件栈。’ Intrator补充说，CoreWeave的软件栈是从零开发的，以优化为指导原则。”
英文原文
For $CRWV its software orchestration according that allows them to turn bare metal into fully functioning supercomputers to their CEO. There’s a 5 min CNBC interview on this Another interview: “The CEO highlighted CoreWeave’s custom-built software stack, which he believes will set the company apart in the long run. He stated, “From our position, we really believe that over time, what’s going to differentiate us from anyone else is the … software stack that drives the performance that we’re able to achieve on our infrastructure.” Intrator added that CoreWeave’s software stack was developed from scratch, with optimization as the guiding principle. “
-
EIP-7918对ETH销毁量影响微乎其微，未改变核心销毁机制。
EIP-7918 设定了与执行成本挂钩的价格下限，但并不会导致销毁率(burn rate)出现实质性跃升。 1. 以 Base 交易为例，L1 数据成本为 0.000000000390881 ETH。若 ETH 价格设为 4000 美元，该成本仅约 0.0000015 美元。应用 EIP-7918 后，在 Base 等 OP Stack 二层网络上的成本增加约 39%，但即使增加后也不超过 0.0000021 美元。微乎其微。 2. “假设以太坊基础费用(base fee)保持在 1 Gwei，且全天每块包含 6 个 Blob，若应用 EIP-7918，因 Blob 费用每日销毁的 ETH 如下：换言之，每日销毁量约为 0.32 ETH。考虑到当以太坊基础费用为 1 Gwei 时，仅基础费用每日就销毁约 100 ETH，这并不算多。”来源：All About Fusaka: Seungmin Jeon 这并未保留机械式的销毁结构。
英文原文
EIP-7918 sets a price floor tied to execution costs but does not translate to a material jump in burn rate 1. In the case of a Base Transaction, 0.000000000390881 ETH was used as the L1 data cost. If we set the ETH price at $4,000, this cost is only about $0.0000015. With EIP-7918 applied, this cost increases by roughly 39% on OP Stack rollups like Base, but even after the increase it does not exceed $0.0000021 Negligible. 2. "Assuming Ethereum’s base fee remains 1 Gwei, and with 6 blobs per block throughout the day, if EIP-7918 is applied, the daily ETH burned due to blob fees would be as follows: In other words, the daily burn would be approximately 0.32 ETH. Considering that around 100 ETH is burned daily from the base fee alone when Ethereum’s base fee is 1 Gwei, that’s not a large amount." Source: All About Fusaka: Seungmin Jeon This does not preserve the mechanical burn structure.
-
L2扩容优化抵消销毁，底价机制下ETH销毁量依然微小。
情况可能比我读到的更糟。你假设我们看到的是L2（Layer 2）创纪录的增长。我则基于适度+轻微增长的视角。借用 @Seungmin Jeon 的数学模型： - 所以并不显著。L2在大多数情况下几乎不在blobs（数据块）上花钱。底价机制防止了费用螺旋降至1 wei。有人分析了EIP-7918：当L1基础费为1 gwei时，底价每天增加约0.32 ETH的blob销毁量。底价是L1基础费的1/16，相对于1 wei有意义，但绝对值依然极小。 - Base的L1数据成本增加39%，从每笔交易$0.0000015升至$0.0000021。PeerDAS增加了8倍的blob容量。 供应扩张而押注需求并非保证的销毁飞轮，L2总是可以优化绕过DA（数据可用性）销毁。更多容量 -> L2围绕其优化 -> 费用维持在底价 -> 销毁保持最低。
英文原文
So it might be even worse from what I've read. You're going under the assumption we're seeing record levels of L2 growth. I'm going under the lens we see modest + slight growth. Just using someone else's math @ Seungmin Jeon - So not meaningfully. l2s currently spend almost no money on blobs in most situations. The floor prevents the spiral to 1 wei. Someone else did an analysis on EIP-7918: the floor adds ~0.32 ETH/day in blob burns when L1 base fee is 1 gwei. The floor is 1/16th of L1 base fee, meaningful relative to 1 wei, but still tiny in absolute terms. - A 39% increase on Base's L1 data cost takes it from $0.0000015 to $0.0000021 per tx. PeerDAS adds 8x blob capacity. Supply expanding while betting on demand isn't guaranteed burn flywheel, L2s can always optimize around DA burn. more capacity ->L2s optimize around it -> fees stay at floor- > burn stays minimal.
-
CRCL暴跌主因是禁售期解禁与流通盘动态，而非仅因降息。
所以，这在一定程度上是正确的。然而我认为 $CRCL 下跌约 50% 的主要原因在于禁售期(lockups)和流通盘(float)动态，而不仅仅是利率降息。我们在 $BULL 首次公开募股(IPO)时就见过这种情况，其以 2% 的流通盘交易，市值一度超过 500 亿美元，但在禁售期结束后暴跌回 60 亿美元。据我记忆，$CRCL 仅以有限的流通盘（约 17%）进行交易，且最近又有 3400 多万股解禁。
英文原文
So, this is partially true. However I’d argue the main reason for $CRCL ~50% drop was lockups and float dynamics, not just rate cuts. We saw this with $BULL ipo where it traded on 2% float upward of $50B and crashed back to $6B post lockup. $CRCL was only trading with a limited float (~17%) if I remember correctly, and another 34M+ got unlocked recently.
-
L2分流导致ETH主网销毁量与交易量脱钩
起初确实如此。现在已大不如前。 附两张图对比交易量与销毁量（细节虽多，但核心观点依然成立）。 简单来说，大量网络活动转移到了二层网络(Layer 2)，即以太坊主网(Ethereum Mainnet)之外。 对于数十亿的交易量，他们只需发布数据块(Blobs)，这基本上只是显示交易发生的压缩数据。 因此，所有这些交易产生的销毁量微乎其微（故图表如此显示）。
英文原文
Originally yes. Not much anymore Attached two photos volume vs. burn (there’s a lot of nuances but point still stands). In simpler terms, lot of network activity went to layer 2, which is off the ethereum mainnet. And then for billions in volume, they can just post blobs, which is basically compressed data showing that transactions happened. The resulting burn for all those transactions is minimal (hence the chart)
-
博主表示求同存异，享受讨论氛围。
@EarningsMindset @VitalikButerin @fundstrat 是的，我觉得我们只是求同存异，你也没错。不过我确实喜欢这样的讨论，干杯。
英文原文
@EarningsMindset @VitalikButerin @fundstrat Yeah I think we just agree to disagree, you're not wrong either. I do enjoy discussions like this though, cheers
-
作者基于技术背景看空ETH，认为其核心机制恶化，同时提及BMNR。
诉诸权威的论证是最糟糕的，因为没有推理过程就毫无价值。以太坊尤其如此，当你看到其核心方面发生负面变化时更是如此（我们从分片(L1 Scaling)转向L2，$ETH代币也从因使用而增值的Gas费代币转变为治理/抵押品代币）。如果你想了解我的背景，我发明了如今大多数钱包使用可信执行环境(TEE)进行密钥签名的方法。我曾在加州大学伯克利分校研究过权益证明(DPoS)和秘密共享。所以我知道得足够多，可以发表评论。我们看看价格会怎么走，这是我个人看空的原因，人们可以自由地用他们自己的钱买入$BMNR并持有$ETH。
英文原文
Arguments from authority are the worst ones because they hold no merit without any reasoning. With Ethereum especially this is true when you see core aspects of it changing in a negative way (we went from L1 scaling with sharding -> L2s, and $ETH token going from a gas token that appreciated from usage to governance/collat). If you want my background though, I invented how most wallets nowadays do key signatures with TEEs. And I was a researcher in dpos + secret sharing back at UC Berkeley. So I do know a tiny bit enough to comment. We'll see where the price goes, it's my individual thesis on why I'm bearish, people are free to buy $BMNR and hold $ETH with their own money.
-
以太坊L2降低费用削弱ETH通缩，作者看空ETH及BMNR。
这进一步印证了我的观点。L2（二层网络）的数据可用性（Data Availability）成本更低，虽有利于扩展性，但无法解决价值向 ETH 回流的问题。我一直认为以太坊实现了扩展，且是极佳的开发网络。但这以牺牲 $ETH 升值潜力为代价，因此我对 $BMNR 也持看跌态度。ETH 的 L2 构想最初对币价有利，因为稀缺的区块空间加上使用量上升形成了费用/销毁飞轮。但：Fusaka 升级 -> 更多 Blob -> 更便宜的数据可用性 -> 更低的 L2 费用。这对 ETH 的费用/销毁机制不利。此前 L1 使用带来的代币销毁是价格升值的首要机械驱动力（如 EIP-1559、合并 -> 通缩），但这已消失。除非情况改变，否则我会继续使用以太坊网络，但绝不会将其代币作为投资标的。
英文原文
So, that just reinforced my point more. L2s get even cheaper data availability, which is good for scaling but doesn't address value accrual to ETH. I've maintained Ethereum managed to scale. And it's a great network to develop on. But all that at the cost of $ETH appreciation, which is why I'm bearish also on $BMNR. ETH's L2 idea was originally good for ETH price because scarce blockspace + rising usage = fee/burn flywheel. But: Fusaka -> more blobs -> cheaper DA -> lower L2 fees. Not good for ETH fee/burn. Token burn from L1 usage was the #1 mechanical driver of price appreciation (eg. EIP-1559, Merge - > deflationary) before but that disappeared. Until that changes, I'll keep using Ethereum as a network but I will absolutely stay away from the token as an investment.
-
ETH网络成功但代币逻辑弱化，对ETH及BMNR持看空观点。
$ETH 最初且简单的投资逻辑是：更多网络使用 -> 更多 Gas 需求 -> 更高的 ETH 价格。 正如你所说，在 L2 + Blobs/EIP-4844 之后，价值体现方式已不同。生态系统使用量 ↑↑↑，L1 Gas + 销毁 ↓。 这也是我对 ETH 作为代币/ $BMNR 作为投资载体持负面看法的原因。以太坊作为网络获胜（它确实赢了）与 $ETH 代币价格上涨是有区别的。 与现已消失的使用量带来的机械性上涨相比，抵押品等经济挂钩极其微弱。
英文原文
The original and simple investment thesis for $ETH was: more network usage -> more gas demand -> higher ETH price . As you mentioned this is no longer the case since value shows up differently after L2s + blobs/EIP-4844. Ecosystem usage ↑↑↑, L1 gas + burn ↓. And this is where I have a negative view of ETH as a token/ $BMNR as a holding vehicle for investment. There's a difference of Ethereum winning as a network (it did), and $ETH token appreciating in price. Economic hooks like collateral, etc. are extremely weak compared to mechanical upside from usage that is now gone.
-
博主回应网友，承认此前观点有误并感谢对方的深入分析。
@Agrippa_Inv 是的，我并没有反对你，因为我已经说过我的观点有误。我只是很荣幸你在事后花时间做了深入分析 lol
英文原文
@Agrippa_Inv Yeah I'm not disagreeing with you since I went out and said it was off. I'm just flattered you spent the time to do a deep dive after the fact lol
-
博主讽刺对方未读更正而发长文回复。
@Agrippa_Inv 很高兴你花时间发了一个40段的回复，而不是去读8小时前发布的更正。https://t.co/0oJT77s1jx
英文原文
@Agrippa_Inv I'm glad you found the time to post a 40 paragraph response instead of reading the correction posted 8 hours ago. https://t.co/0oJT77s1jx
-
ETH网络增长但价值外流，L2导致销毁量低，高价下投资逻辑失效。
以太坊网络本身正在增长。但 Vitalik 扩展以太坊的方式将经济价值从资产本身推开了。 这就是让 $ETH / $BMNR 在 $4K 以上成为糟糕投资（尽管是好交易）的残酷经济现实。 L2 削弱了持有者的价值捕获，因为数据可用性(DA)和区块空间(blockspace)并非如此运作（10倍使用量 -> 10倍 DA 费用 -> 10倍销毁）。生态系统使用量创历史新高，但 $ETH 销毁量却处于历史低位(ATL)，这正是展示这种差异的关键指标。 压缩的低成本 Blob 意味着数十亿级的 L2 活动仅转化为极少量的主网 ETH 支出。 主网每天仅销毁数十枚 ETH，远低于 EIP-4844 之前的数百/数千枚。你说得对，L2 确实改变了 ETH 的价值捕获机制……通过将其移出 ETH。 你可以争论作为抵押品资产的投资选项和价值捕获的转移。但最初证明 ETH 作为投资合理性的主要代币经济学已不复存在： ETH 作为资产的价格不再与网络使用量成比例增长。
英文原文
Ethereum's network itself is growing. But the way Vitalik scaled Ethereum pushed economic value away from the asset. That's the sad economic reality that makes $ETH / $BMNR a terrible investment above $4K (it's a good trade). L2's weakened value accrual for holders because it doesn't work this way with DA and blockspace (10x usage -> 10x DA fees -> 10x burn). Ecosystem usage hits new highs, yet $ETH burn ATLs is exactly what you look at to show this disparity. Compressed, low-cost blobs mean that billions in L2 activity translate into only a tiny amount of ETH spent on mainnet Mainnet is burning tens of eth a day, down from hundreds/thousands a day before EIP-4844. You're right by saying L2s have genuinely changed ETH's value accrual mechanics... by moving it off of ETH. You can argue collateral asset as a investment option and a shift of value accrual. But the main token economics that originally justified ETH as an investment doesn't exist anymore: ETH price as an asset no longer scales proportionately with network usage.
-
ETH因L2抽离价值致主网收入崩塌，代币缺乏投资吸引力。
最后，@VitalikButerin 完美指出了我对 $ETH 看空以及 @fundstrat 的 $BMNR 的原因。 $ETH 作为一种代币是极差的投资，尤其是在 $4K 以上时。 这是 Tom Lee、Cathie Wood 的 ARK 创新基金、Vitalik 等人没有理解的一点： 以太坊网络(Ethereum network)与作为实用代币的 ETH 之间存在脱节。 以太坊网络（正在增长）的增长并不转化为代币价格的上涨。 如果你在 2021 年底附近买入 $ETH，你会亏钱。与此同时，$BTC 的价格自那时以来上涨了接近 300%。为什么？ 二层网络(Layer 2s)。 1. Vitalik 在过去几年鼓励用户转向 L2（如 Base）。结果现在这些网络处理数十亿的交易量，但所有费用都流向了像 Coinbase（排序器 sequencer）这样的公司，而不是以太坊的验证者。 2. L2 支付存储数据的费用，但这与它们从以太坊主网(Ethereum mainnet)抽离的经济价值相比微乎其微。 就是这样。L2 抽走了利润和活动，而以太坊网络几乎收不到任何数据存储费。价值积累(Value accrual)流向了像 Coinbase 这样的公司，而不是 ETH 代币持有者。 以太坊网络使用量创历史新高，但主网收入崩溃，持有代币作为投资几乎没有经济激励。 除非有协议变更能从 L2 活动中为 ETH 代币产生合理的价值积累，否则不要将 ETH 作为投资。
英文原文
Finally, @VitalikButerin perfectly pointed out why I’m bearish on ETH, and @fundstrat’s $BMNR. $ETH as a token is a terrible investment, especially above $4K. This is what Tom Lee, Cathie Wood’s ARK innovation, Vitalik and others didn’t understand: There is a disconnect between Ethereum as a network and ETH as a utility token. Ethereum network (that’s growing) does not translate to the token price appreciating. If you bought $ETH near the end of 2021, you would have lost money. Meanwhile $BTC price has appreciated close to 300% since then. Why? Layer 2s. 1. Vitalik encouraged users to move to L2s (like Base) over the past few years. As a result now these networks move billions in volume but all fees go to companies like Coinbase (sequencer) not validators on Ethereum. 2. L2s pay fees to store their data but this is just incredibly minimal compared to the economic value they siphoned off of Ethereum mainnet. That’s it. Layer 2s siphoned off profit, activity, while the Ethereum’s network receives barely anything for data storage. Value accrual went to companies like Coinbase, not ETH token holders. Ethereum’s Network usage is at an all-time high, but Mainnet revenue has collapsed and there’s little economic incentive to hold the token as an investment. Unless there’s protocol changes that generate reasonable value accrual to the ETH token from L2 activity, don’t bother with ETH as an investment.
-
批评Vitalik将用户导向L2导致主网贡献不足。
@VitalikButerin 你把所有人都转移到了 Layer 2 (L2)……现在却惊讶于 Base 等网络吸走了所有用户，却对以太坊主网贡献甚微。
英文原文
@VitalikButerin You moved everyone to L2s… and are now surprised that networks like Base siphoned off all the users while contributing little back to Ethereum mainnnet.
-
调侃为建数据中心而清理葡萄园。
@RJCcapital @sam_badawi @NighthawkTradez @amitisinvesting @mvcinvesting 看起来 Vineland 已经没多少葡萄藤了。想必是为了给新的 $NBIS 数据中心腾出空间，把丛林都清理掉了。
英文原文
@RJCcapital @sam_badawi @NighthawkTradez @amitisinvesting @mvcinvesting Doesn’t look like there’s many vines anymore in Vineland. Must have cleared out the jungle to make room for the new $NBIS datacenter