President Vs Politicians price

On-chain, new assets are being minted every day. Zora, Base, Blast, Farcaster... these platforms are like coin factories, constantly releasing speculative desires. But we should also ask: Are they all the same in what they produce? Tools vs Products: No one-size-fits-all They are typical zero-friction speculative platforms, quickly minting coins and automatically pooling them, with clear games—it's all about play. Zora, on the other hand, is more like a cultural platform, focusing on $NFT, $ERC20, limited minting, emphasizing creator expression and cultural experimentation. Platforms are just tools; their quality depends on the following points: 1️⃣ What kind of $Token is issued 2️⃣ Is there a good story told 3️⃣ Is there community support 4️⃣ Is there incentive design 5️⃣ Is there a real flywheel (positive cycle) Ultimately, it's not about the platform; it's about whether the assets you issue can stand on their own. $CulturalCoin ≠ $SpeculativeCoin The core of the controversy is: Is a cultural coin a scam? The answer is: Most are, but a few are not. Those $Meme / $Culture projects that survive usually do three things: 🔥 Consensus building: The story is engaging 🔥 Community operation: Continuous content + interaction 🔥 Mechanism design: Can guide holding + re-creation + growth Conversely, those projects that shout cultural slogans but rely on $KOLs to pump usually go to zero in three weeks. So the question isn't whether you say you're a cultural coin, but rather: Are you really doing culture, or are you just using culture as a guise to exploit people? Investors need to upgrade their judgment Today's on-chain market is an extremely flat information landscape with extremely complex behaviors—a $PvP game. ❌ Not every $Meme is garbage ❌ Not every $AI or $NFT is reliable ❌ And just because something is pumped doesn't mean it will go to zero; what Zora mints may indeed have value. What you really need to learn are the following types of judgment: 1️⃣ Look at the mechanism: Is the tokenomics reasonable? 2️⃣ Look at the rhythm: Is there a clear rhythm and operational plan? 3️⃣ Look at the community: Is there spontaneous content and viral momentum? If you can't understand it, that's okay—but please don't deceive yourself by saying this time is really different. In summary: You can call it $CreatorCoins, $AITokens, $CultureTokens, $ChainNativeAssets... But if there's no flywheel, no rhythm, no community, just pure minting + pooling, then it's just a rebranded $shitcoin. In the end, it's still a zero-sum game. The issue isn't the platform, nor is it the $Meme, but rather: Do you have the ability to recognize value, And do you have the courage to acknowledge reality.

GM, @pear_protocol Builders code @HyperliquidX Higherliquid

@adderrels pledge has exceeded 1904, with a total of 3420 pledges, and the pledge rate has reached 56%, and the current market value of BRC2.0 is only 2 million

Rare occasion when something in crypto was hyped the absolutely right amount 🎯 @hyperliquidX builder codes delivered on all the buzz. TLDR: third-party apps get % fees on fills they send on users' behalf. @pvp_dot_trade success story painted the picture, but builder codes + superior product did the trick. Without solid tech, builder codes mean nothing. Perfect example: @phantom chose HL for in-app perps because it made business sense. → Best on-chain trading venue → Well-connected across chains via bridges/@hyperunit → Direct monetization for frontends through builder codes The fundamentals just align beautifully on @HyperliquidX for most traders and businesses. Build distribution, make it sticky to your interface, bring net new users, you get paid for all of it.