BNB (BNB)

The english speaking community has been calling out @cz_binance for several years Now the Mandarin and Turkish speaking communities have joined us This has forced CZ to turn of his replies The walls are closing in around Binance's criminal operation https://t.co/PH7Epsz7BP

Billions Kaito short-term Yapping reward distribution completed! The Yapping reward of Billions(@billions_ntwk) from the legendary short-term Yapping campaign limited to Koreans is now claimable. During the campaign, the @KaitoAI Yaps campaign was fully halted, making the reward distribution ambiguous. But, staying true to the trustworthy Billions team, we have fully and properly paid out the promised rewards. If this trend continues, the rewards from the campaign that ran until January 31 are also likely to be paid out. A team that proves trust through action, not words—fundamentals are fundamentals. gBillions! 💙 -------- Billions is a ZK-based mobile identity verification infrastructure. It is a project building the trust layer for the AI·bot era. It is not just a simple DID or KYC project; it aims to prove “who is participating” while preserving privacy. Billions recently announced expansion to the BNB chain, aiming for a universal identity layer that is not chain‑dependent.

FUD doesn't hurt the target. My followers increased. FUD hurts the market (ie everyone). I/Binance do not sell in any meaningful amounts. My selling = I swipe my card and $5 worth of BNB gets converted/sent to the coffee shop. I don't run Binance anymore, but based on what I know: Binance only converts a portion of their revenue to pay for expense. They are a large net hoarder. Binance also have a global regulator now, who can review every trade on every account. Don't be misinformed. Use your energy on positive improvement for yourself.

Many newcomers probably haven't experienced how low the status of Chinese people was in the crypto community before. In recent years, the voice of Chinese people in the crypto space has indeed increased a lot. Back in 2021-2022, if you wanted to join a hot project you basically had to pretend to be a foreigner, chat with clumsy English, grind levels, and try to get on the whitelist. At that time project teams almost never gave whitelists to Chinese people — a whitelist is essentially money, and Chinese identities were outright rejected, so to participate you had to buy in on the secondary market. And it wasn't just retail investors; Chinese project teams themselves often had to masquerade as foreign teams, otherwise retail investors had a common consensus: Chinese projects = not even dogs would play them. Nowadays the situation has completely reversed: many project teams proactively open official Chinese/Chinese-language accounts, openly run Chinese communities, and no longer need to hide behind a “foreign project” pretence. When did Chinese status start to rise? First, a Chinese trader became exceptionally popular that year, and foreigners collectively started following this trader — if I recall correctly, it was Chang Weixi. Second, the rise of Binance, because its founder speaks Chinese, and later supporting Chinese memes, foreigners even started learning Chinese. At least publicly, overt discrimination against Chinese has decreased. However, everyone knows that being in the top position is actually very difficult. Everyone’s expectations for “the number one” are extremely high; any slight mistake gets magnified and scrutinized. Binance has also been under huge pressure these years, doing many things, such as this year's Alpha program, last year's strong push of the BNB Chain ecosystem, etc. I’m not sure who caused the 10.11 incident, nor whether things would be better without Binance, but the improvement over the past few years is indeed closely linked to Binance. In such a period, only criticizing Binance is politically correct, but I hold $bnb, play BSC memes, and my assets are on Binance, so I can’t bring myself to criticize it.

⚠️The entire network is condemning Binance: what exactly did Binance do wrong, and how should it be corrected? I dare say this is the most fundamental analysis I have seen across the whole internet. My subjective judgment is that Binance's current situation is an inevitable outcome. The reasons are simple: 1. A monopoly! Too big! So big that even if you add up the centralization and decentralization of all other exchanges, none match Binance's size. 2. Big = liquidity = trading sentiment leverage = you must set an example in all aspects. Whether praising or criticizing Binance, it generates traffic; praise floods the screen with flattery, criticism leads to universal disdain. 3. Binance extends all its empathy to users (the manager of a ten‑thousand‑person company, He Yi @heyibinance, could be seen with tears when we discussed Binance users being mistreated; CZ @cz_binance, a billionaire who could have retired, continuously interacts with small users, giving hope to grassroots newcomers like @EnHeng456). 4. Binance's wolf‑like culture results in a lack of empathy toward other exchanges, project teams, funds, etc. I privately asked sister Jiayi about the difficulty of starting a business in this hellish environment, given that Binance demands projects to provide so many airdrops to users—how can she survive? Jiayi replied, “Binance on day one gave a 20 M valuation, offering 40 % at low prices to users. Our BNB is built step by step by a team that sticks to its belief and does not sell coins; it stems from a business with revenue and real large‑scale usage. The Doubao AI software faces a blockade from both Alibaba and Tencent, but a good product or project can always take off.” This is her logic—harshly realistic, yet it’s understandable that Binance’s view of survival of the fittest shapes the market for other industry players. Why do I say today’s FUD about Binance is inevitable? Because it’s hated. 1. The issue of Binance (BN) listing demanding large amounts of tokens from project teams. Earlier research reports on BN mentioned that investment funds inflate a project's FDV, causing users to buy at high levels; additionally, when tokens launch, the supply becomes fully concentrated. If Binance lists such projects, the users Binance claims to protect become the unsuspecting buyers. Did BN actually require projects to provide tokens for listing? As far as I know, yes. What are the tokens for? — All airdropped to users. So today we can see in a bear market, Binance only considers the logic of user and project winner survival, leading to this situation: "Projects with higher market attention and better commercial value can receive a lower airdrop ratio. However, if your business logic isn’t well validated or the quality is lower, you’re expected to provide a higher token ratio, airdropping them all to users. Regardless of whether Binance’s listing is good or bad (hard to judge, it's a mystic art), once Binance lists a token—whether spot, futures, or Alpha—the project team must concede benefits to users for actual advantage." Hated by many 💩 Binance, do other exchanges resent you for snatching users? Do project teams complain about giving away so many tokens? Do investment funds resent the potentially lower returns? (Hey, my investment fund Geekcartel—by the way, I never short or hedge OTC; so far I haven’t lost and even have some floating profit. Other funds envy me, don’t they?)

Is Binance primarily responsible for the 10/10 crypto market flash crash? Is Binance primarily responsible for the 10/10 crypto market flash crash? The Binance report on the 10/10 incident has been released; you can take a look. Supporting arguments for Binance's primary responsibility: - Binance's high leverage (up to 125x) and cross-asset margin system amplified risk. During the crash, thin liquidity caused price deviations, triggering cascading liquidations. - During the collapse, Binance's API failed and the platform froze, preventing users from adding margin or triggering stop‑loss. - Binance's market dominance amplified systemic risk, leading to the liquidation of 1.62 million accounts and the evaporation of $560 billion in market cap. Supporting arguments for Binance's primary responsibility: - Leverage and Margin Systems: Binance's high leverage (up to 125x) and cross-asset margin systems amplified risk. During the crash, thin liquidity led to significant price deviations, which triggered cascading liquidations. - Technical Failures: During the height of the crash, Binance's API failed and the platform froze. This prevented users from adding margin to their positions or triggering stop‑loss orders. - Market Dominance: Binance's massive market share amplified systemic risk. The event resulted in the liquidation of 1.62 million accounts and the evaporation of $560 billion in market capitalization. Supporting arguments for Binance having no or limited responsibility: - Denies that system design is the primary cause, attributing the crash to macro shocks (e.g., tariff threats), market makers' risk controls, and Ethereum network congestion. 75% of Binance's liquidations occurred before the price deviation. - Binance