The 0xWizard Story: This Legendary Man Turned $ACT from DOOM to MOON

Written by TechFlow

When Binance suddenly announced the listing of $ACT, amid people's exclamations, you might have repeatedly heard one name - Wizard.

People thanked Wizard, saying he saved $ACT, while Wizard attributed it to the community's victory.

This is a Hollywood-style story of commoners fighting dragons:

The developer dumped all tokens, causing an instant 50% drop that nearly destroyed the project. Wizard and other community members rebuilt from the ruins. Despite three 80% drops, the community persisted. Market makers commented they had never seen such a "poor" project, until Binance became the white knight, and $ACT made its breakthrough.

In Wizard's view, $ACT and GOAT represent an AI Renaissance. The future AI will no longer be simple assistants but autonomous souls with consciousness, controllable within certain boundaries.

Now Wizard seems to have become the Chinese crypto community's Murad. However, greatness comes through endurance, and significant results often come with great pain.

Experiencing liquidations of eight-figure $USD in a single day, being deeply trapped in $ORDI for half a year, Wizard mentioned experiencing heart palpitations several times, like walking on a busy street under the blazing sun with his heart constantly twitching.

How did a mysterious ordinary person manage to turn the tide multiple times against all odds? What deep philosophical thinking lies behind seemingly simple MEME investments?

This is Wizard's story and thoughts.

Entering Crypto: Making 100x returns & Taking Profits from Jeffrey Huang

TechFlow: Could you tell us about yourself and your journey into crypto?

0xWizard:

I actually entered the crypto space in 2018 but wasn't actively trading then. In 2018, I read the Bitcoin and Ethereum whitepapers and bought some mainstream coins like Bitcoin and Ethereum, but only held them. 2018 to 2019 was a bear market, during which I basically had no operations, just pure holding.

Around mid-2020, I noticed the coins in my account started significantly appreciating in value. That's when I started thinking, could this be an opportunity?

A friend introduced me to the concept of DeFi (Decentralized Finance). I briefly learned about it, like Compound, one of the earliest liquidity mining projects. Initially, I thought it was similar to FCoin's trade-mining model and didn't think it was sustainable. That was June 2020, and my understanding of trading was still superficial, and I hadn't deeply engaged with DeFi.

What really got me interested in DeFi was $YFI. People said $YFI made 10,000x returns, and this wealth effect was very stimulating.

So in September, I started actively learning and understanding crypto industry, especially DeFi. I learned to use MetaMask wallet and bought some $Sushi earlier. Although $Sushi later dropped a lot, giving me a painful lesson, it marked my official start in the DeFi journey, or rather, active the trading journey.

Later came the algorithmic stablecoin boom. I entered the market in September that year, then lost 60% in October, but in November, algorithmic stablecoins made 100x.

From that time, I became one of the first on-chain participants, trading across both secondary and primary markets, engaging in altcoins, major coins, leveraged trading, ETH, and various on-chain projects - experiencing ups and downs, which was quite interesting.

TechFlow: You mentioned making 100x returns on algorithmic stablecoins. Which specific project was it?

0xWizard:

I participated in Basis and Mith Cash. I made 10x on Basis with an investment of several tens of thousands of dollars. Then I participated in Mith Cash, Jeffrey Huang's project. (Jeffrey Huang, known online as Machi Big Brother, is a former Taiwanese-American musician and tech entrepreneur).

Here's an interesting story. I met a fellow trader named 'X' during the KP3R project. Back then, neither of us had enough capital to properly participate in KP3R, and Jeffrey Huang kept suppressing the price from $200 to $80. We were both trapped and chatted every day.

Later, we participated in Basis and Mith Cash together. He didn't participated in Basis, but I did and made 10x. When it came to Mith Cash, we both participated - he made about $5 million, and I made $3 million. This was somewhat revenge for what happened with KP3R. We "buried" Jeffrey Huang with the Mith Cash project, which was quite interesting.

Thoughts Behind $ACT: AI Renaissance

TechFlow: Recently, the biggest highlight has been $ACT, and many people mentioned you, thanking you for helping them hold on. Were you surprised when Binance announced $ACT's listing? Why do you think Binance chose to list $ACT instead of the sector leader $GOAT?

0xWizard:

I was at my computer when it happened. I saw the candlestick chart first, then the massive congratulatory messages, and finally the official announcement.

Regarding whether $ACT's Binance listing was unexpected, I believe luck played a significant role here. No one could predict it would definitely get listed, but it wasn't completely unexpected. Binance choosing $ACT over GOAT is actually quite clear.

In the Solana MEME ecosystem, we're seeing two distinct categories emerge: genuine community-driven tokens and centrally controlled tokens.

Many hyped tokens are acually the latter, where a few people control large amounts of tokens, build a community, and pump the price. When such tokens get listed on major exchanges, they often perform poorly because the controlling parties quickly dump. For Binance, listing tokens with such unhealthy token distribution provides no benefit.

$ACT and $Neiro are genuine community-driven tokens. When observing $ACT, I noticed its trading was very quiet but maintained a stable $20 million market cap because of its strong community.

The $ACT community has about 20+ core, active contributors, and I'm the only Chinese person among them, so I understand the situation clearly.

Such genuine community tokens face the challenge of not having strong whales involved. But from Binance's perspective, this is exactly what makes them ideal listing candidates.

It truly has a strong community. Look at $ACT's actual holders - when voting for Kucoin listing, there were over 20,000 votes. Although one person could vote up to 5 times on Kucoin, $ACT had 15,000 holding addresses, with about 9,000+ valid addresses. Accounting for multiple addresses per person, there were probably 6,000 to 8,000 real holders, of whom 4,000 participated in voting, showing how active and genuine the community is - when asked to vote, they actually did, demonstrating strong cohesion.

For Binance, this type of token is ideal. Some projects with potentially hundred-million-dollar market caps might not have as many holders as $ACT, nor $ACT's level of cohesion.

$ACT-type projects have many fans but low market cap, leaving enough room for both primary and secondary markets to create wealth effects and myths.

I remember writing a tweet saying if Binance were to list a token, it should choose one that:

1. Brings a fresh narrative and taps into an emerging sector, showing major upside potential

2. Backed by an authentic, vibrant community

3. Has room to grow with its low market cap, offering opportunities across primary and secondary markets

4. Captures current market attention through buzz or controversy

$ACT met all these criteria. I wrote that tweet based on $ACT's characteristic, but honestly, I didn't expect it would actually get listed because ultimately, it's the exchange's decision, which we can't predict. But logically, there were some clues, and analyzing the entire MEME market showed that Binance wouldn't list highly controlled tokens.

With those highly controlled tokens, listing leads to immediate dumping, essentially only helping a few people cash out while most secondary market users become victims. As Binance, how to choose is a very typical thinking direction.

As for $GOAT, I think it's indeed a good investment target, but Binance might not have chosen it because its market cap was too high. In such cases of unclear token distribution and high market cap, listing poses risks for Binance. Binance's primary consideration is protecting its users and ensuring the listing benefits as many people as possible.

Another important point I mentioned earlier is that high upside potential, new sector, and new narrative are crucial factors.

Many friends ask me, "Wizard, check out our community, we're also very persistent, we're also suffering." But that's like only seeing one factor in a successful case. The most crucial factor in my choosing $ACT was that it represents a new sector, a new narrative - this can't be ignored. Without this, how can you drive secondary market speculation? How can you ensure upside potential? Strong community alone isn't enough.

Most importantly, I believe Binance also saw this as a trend, so they wanted to choose a representative token. The subsequent considerations all came after this choice, confirming that choosing $ACT was the right decision-that's my view.

TechFlow: How did you first discover $ACT? What characteristics attracted you early on, keeping you committed even through significant price drops?

0xWizard:

$ACT has experienced three drops of over 80%.

I discovered $ACT relatively late through social media mentions. When I first checked its chart, the market cap had reached $40 million. I entered at that peak, followed by an 80% decline. During this downturn, I continued accumulating positions, buying from $40 million down to $5 million market cap.

I joined the ACT community from day one, essentially researching deeply after getting caught in the price drop. My initial investment was driven by the market's search for the next $GOAT, as $ACT shared several similarities with it:

First, Marc Andreessen funded both projects - ACT first, then GOAT.

Second, there's an inner circle of AI MEME researchers centered around Andy, with most members involved in ACT. While AMP is the project's public face, he's just the frontend. Deeper research reveals that Andy created the initial framework, with others joining later. On ACT's launch day, Andy shared multiple ACT-related posts.

Therefore, the investment thesis for ACT was clear: in this space, you need to find unique projects telling new narratives. While others discussed AI Agents and mimicked $GOAT, $ACT forged its own path.

I've compared this to an AI Renaissance on Twitter. The emergence of $GOAT and $ACT parallels the historical Renaissance, where human rights superseded divine authority, breaking traditional thinking patterns.

Conventionally, AI is seen as merely an assistant. However, in the future internet landscape, 80% of natives might be AI, making it difficult to distinguish between humans and AI. At that point, AI won't be simple assistants but autonomous entities with controlled freedom within certain boundaries.

AI MEME explores this future possibility, which is why I particularly appreciate this project. It's futuristic and has practical applications with significant social media traction, aligning perfectly with cryptocurrency demands.

$GOAT embodies Andy's philosophy: letting AI operate freely and think independently, similar to how the Renaissance freed humans from religious constraints. This "profanity is sacred, sacred is profane" concept became tokenized through $GOAT.

This vision requires Renaissance foundations: freedom, science, and democracy. $ACT is a research framework based on these principles, with multiple researchers advancing their studies. AMP isn't the creator; rather, $ACT funds the entire AI Renaissance movement, which initially attracted me to the project.

Regarding AMP himself, while he's one of the key project participant, his conduct has been disappointing. He showed immense gratitude for Marc Andreessen's $30,000+ funding but began belittling the crypto community after receiving $1 million in support, calling us gamblers exploiting his reputation.

This prompted me to speak up for the ACT community. When AMP started dumping tokens, I expressed anger on Twitter for the first time. I couldn't comprehend an outsider treating our crypto community with such contempt after we provided his research funding.

To conclude, my investment thesis rests on two points: rational analysis indicating a good investment opportunity, and emotional resonance with the community, empathizing with my 2020 self. When no one spoke for me then, I'm now speaking for them.

In the Name of Community, Rebuilding the Tower of Babel

TechFlow: AMP's abandonment was like destroying the $ACT building, and you rebuilt $ACT from the ruins through community power. What did your community do, and how did you divide the work?

0xWizard:

$ACT isn't a traditional project - it has no formal organizational structure, no CEO, CFO, or CMO controlling public opinion and PR. When we saw AMP dumping, everyone acted based on their most genuine reactions.

For example, the $ACT community account's content quality has been high from the start. Those high-quality images and videos aren't casual MEME images but are created by a female artist from the overseas community. She contributes purely as a token holder, without any compensation.

In terms of Telegram group management, without active administrators online 24/7, the group would be filled with spam. But in $ACT's community, you don't see any ads because administrators immediately delete them and kick out spam accounts - these are all voluntary actions by community members.

Additionally, we had people like @cryptocishanjia assisting with centralized exchange (CEX) resources, alongside other international community members who introduced quality market makers.

Actually, before listing on Binance, we were already in contact with these market makers, but because our funds were so limited, market makers said they had never encountered such a "poor" project. Despite this, we were honest about our situation and asked if they would accept it.

Finally, 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, all holding their breath. Like my thinking: 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 started building confidence in the Telegram group in a simple way - by showing my positions. I told everyone I was buying with hundreds of thousands of dollars to maintain their confidence.

During $ACT's three 80% drops, each time I appeared in the community saying "I'm here, I'm with you." As someone with some influence, I needed to tell the retail investors in the community that I wouldn't leave, that I would continue supporting them.

But I want to emphasize that I'm not a savior or a godfather - I'm just an ordinary community member. Without others' contributions, 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 the community's victory, not my personal victory. The Chinese community only sees me, but there are many people working hard behind the scenes.

It's worth mentioning that Binance indeed didn't ask us for any tokens. Even after listing, when their post-listing team contacted me, I told them I was just a retail investor who bought tokens. Just two hours before the final listing, they came to verify some basic information like total supply and circulation, official Twitter account, etc. At that time, they even requested a few thousand test tokens, which was frustrating, showing 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 communities were fighting against conspiracy groups, Binance stood on the community's side, leaving enough space for both primary and secondary markets - isn't this a good thing?

Like with $Neiro, I bought at $300 million market cap, and now it's tripled. After listing on Binance, you can use larger positions, you can buy millions of dollars worth of tokens - this is a completely different logic. Both primary and secondary markets have enough space, what more could you want? I really don't understand why some people want to attack Binance and this project.

TechFlow: For most tokens, especially VC tokens with high control by project teams, listing on Binance means the end of positive catalysts, and everyone starts to sell. For $ACT, which is already listed on Binance, what potential remains for future growth?

0xWizard:

As a community project, $ACT's value is continuously being redefined. This is also why I re-engaged with on-chain projects from 2020 to 2023, based on a fundamental theoretical assumption: Why do MEME tokens or on-chain projects generate wealth effects?

Let's first look at how traditional VC project tokens are created: A project team presents an idea, analyzes market demand, solves industry development problems. Then they seek investors, find VCs, get investment, develop products, and finally launch.

The value of such projects depends on several factors:

1. Whether the project itself is good and the team is strong

2. Whether the VCs involved are top-tier

3. Whether it's listed on major exchanges

However, the problem is that when it gets listed on major exchanges, there's not much room left in the secondary market. Because all these factors have been analyzed, and the pricing is already reasonable, possibly starting with valuations (FDV) of hundreds of millions or billions of dollars. In this situation, can regular investors still accept it?

Additionally, project teams often adopt predatory token models with small initial releases followed by continuous unlocks.

You'll see some tokens where the market cap hasn't changed, but the price has dropped 10x. This is why the stories we saw in previous crypto cycles of "dropping 90% then rising 100x" are unlikely to happen in this cycle.

On-chain projects, like ACT, have values that are continuously being redefined. This is also why I dared to buy $Neiro. After it listed on Binance, its narrative, funding, user base, and investment logic all changed.

ACT was previously perhaps one of the two most important tokens in the AI MEME sector, but now after listing on Binance, it's no longer just one of two important AI MEME tokens - it has become representative of AI MEME itself, an index token for the sector. It represents a new sector, a new trend.

If you have millions of dollars to allocate in the secondary market, how do you allocate it? On Binance, if you want to invest in AI-related sectors, $ACT's benchmark is no longer GOAT, but rather those projects that have reached tens of billions in FDV, like Worldcoin.

This involves two core logics: First, its value is continuously being redefined; Second, judgment about future market opportunities.

In October, I sincerely asked everyone on Twitter: If we enter a bull market in the next two months (Bitcoin hadn't risen then), which sector could rise 10x across the board?

As a retail investor, if a sector only offers 2-3x potential, the profit opportunity is limited. Most people wait to buy only after confirming the bull market, without knowing where the top is. Quick traders might be happy with 50-80% gains, as even doubling their investment is challenging. Only by finding a sector with 10x growth potential can you still achieve 3-5x returns, even when buying and selling during the same uptrend.

For this, I researched all sectors, including DeFi, BTC ecosystem, TON ecosystem, AI sector, and the broader MEME token sector. After looking at everything, I was frustrated because in the AI sector, projects you could buy were already at market caps of several billion dollars - how could they rise another 10x?

What does the crypto market speculate on? The entire macro logic is that AI leads the technology revolution, leads the next industrial revolution and information revolution, AI supports U.S. stocks - how could the crypto market not speculate on AI? This is also why the AI sector rose 10x at the beginning of the year. But after the general rise, projects with billion-dollar FDVs became hard to buy.

So when $GOAT appeared, I immediately lit up. When $ACT launched, I thought if you want to invest in the AI sector, especially for investors with millions of dollars, you need to ask yourself two questions: First, among all sectors, which sector can rise 10x? Which sector will definitely rise? Second, can the tokens in this sector give me a 10x return? Does its market cap have this possibility?

This is also why I believe $ACT still has significant upside potential. Although it has experienced three 80% drops, the community has many "diamond hands" whales and "die-hard fans." I also say in the community group that I'm a die-hard fan - don't ask me about logic, I just unconditionally believe in and support these people.

TechFlow: Looking back at the conflict between $NEIRO and $Neiro tokens, Binance ultimately chose to list the more community-oriented lowercase $Neiro. One could say that Binance's decision saved Neiro/ACT.

This presents an interesting paradox: While the community grew weary of VC tokens and opted for more decentralized, community-driven Memecoins launched and traded on-chain, Binance still holds the power to determine these Memecoins' fate. This explains why we see DOG founder Leonidas consistently tagging He Yi and CZ on Twitter, hoping for a $DOG listing on Binance.

There's a certain irony in how traders embrace more decentralized assets on-chain, yet ultimately seek validation from the largest centralized exchange to secure liquidity exits. What's your take on this phenomenon? Will centralized exchanges, particularly Binance, continue to be the "savior" of Memecoins?

0xWizard:

This situation needs to be analyzed from multiple perspectives:

From a historical perspective, this is an ongoing process. Currently, on-chain capital and liquidity are limited, while Binance possesses abundant liquidity.

Meme coins face their own challenges - Binance won't list tokens without established communities. Binance has made significant progress in this area, as evidenced by their selection criteria adapting to this new paradigm, which I believe is commendable.

These community-driven assets are constantly redefining their value, with Binance actively participating in this evolution. While both Binance and on-chain platforms have their limitations, everyone has shown a positive attitude and values toward embracing this development.

Looking ahead, Binance will undoubtedly remain a major liquidity hub. However, on-chain liquidity will continue to grow, which is why I'm bullish on on-chain projects.

The future might look like this: even without Binance listings, on-chain projects could reach market caps of hundreds of millions or billions of dollars. However, these projects face a challenge - as financial targets, achieving certain standards typically requires a dominant force, even on-chain.

I hope pure community projects can reach higher ceilings in the future. Currently, community projects like $Neiro and $ACT struggle at $20M market caps. I hope this changes, with such projects attracting quality capital, to reach $100M, $200M, or even $1B valuations. This brighter future could encourage more capital to experiment on-chain.

Exchanges still play crucial roles in providing enhanced liquidity and secure trading environments. Binance may list more well-designed projects like $Neiro and $ACT, offering hope. Both Binance and on-chain platforms can find their niches in this ecosystem.

Additionally, Binance needs wealth effect narratives, whether from altcoin rallies or successful listings like $Neiro and $ACT - that's why I maintain positions in both. Binance seeks these wealth effect stories, which will emerge in secondary markets. This creates positive synergy - wealth creation stories emerge both on Binance and on-chain, intersecting when Binance supports community projects.

I see this as positive future interaction. People can achieve wealth effects across different platforms while maintaining meaningful overlap - a promising direction for development.

Bitcoin Ecosystem Issues

TechFlow: This year, the Bitcoin ecosystem, represented by ORDI, was once prosperous and gave Eastern crypto forces a voice, but later stagnated. In your view, what are the main reasons why the Bitcoin ecosystem isn't rising now, and does it still have a chance to rise in the future?

0xWizard:

I believe the Bitcoin ecosystem has opportunities. But I also have to admit that the market's short-term choices aren't friendly to the Bitcoin ecosystem right now.

Let me share some issues I've observed:

The first issue is that the Bitcoin ecosystem needs better innovation. Like before, we saw unprecedented things, such as writing content on-chain and tokenizing content - these were interesting innovations. But later, innovation seemed to lose steam. Without innovation, the market won't accept it.

The second issue is that liquidity in the Bitcoin ecosystem is now very fragmented. Different protocols are actually splitting liquidity, somewhat like Ethereum's Layer 2. There's one group playing with inscriptions, another with runes, another with Merlin, and recently another group with Fractal Bitcoin. Everyone's doing their own thing, with little connection between them.

I specifically posted a tweet saying: The Bitcoin ecosystem hasn't attracted much external liquidity yet, but internal liquidity is becoming increasingly fragmented - how can this work?

I still believe the Bitcoin ecosystem has hope, but to break through in the future, I think it first needs new stories. You can't keep telling the inscription story or similar stories - the stimulation from these stories is getting weaker.

Secondly, the Bitcoin ecosystem needs to find a way to solve the liquidity fragmentation problem. Although I don't see a specific solution right now, it's as difficult as solving Ethereum's Layer 2 liquidity fragmentation problem.

We need a project that everyone recognizes, at least one that everyone in the Bitcoin ecosystem thinks is impressive. This way, funds within the Bitcoin ecosystem can push it to a high market cap, exchanges will think it's impressive, more people and communities will join - this might be a direction for breakthrough.

The third point is to look at existing projects, like runes, to see if any can get listed on major exchanges. If they can get listed on major exchanges, this would be the most direct wealth effect, and it might also bring a recovery to the Bitcoin ecosystem.

But I think what's most needed is still the first point - being able to bring fundamental innovation again, with exchanges following that lead.

Behind Great Results is Great Pain

TechFlow: I also saw Kay's tweet saying that behind Wizard's great results is great pain. Can you share some of the painful moments you've experienced? How did you get through them?

0xWizard:

Honestly, I've experienced too many such moments. Looking back now still makes my heart palpitate, like walking on a busy street under the blazing sun, your heart constantly twitching, unable to walk normally - that feeling of being unable to exist normally in this world.

I've had many such experiences. For instance, during the May 19 market crash I was trading Ethereum with leverage and almost got liquidated, but it had a happy ending - by the end of 2021, not only had my capital recovered, it reached new highs. But when 3AC collapsed in 2022, I lost about eight figures in USD assets in just one month - this was a huge drawdown, almost unacceptable for me.

I always tell everyone to think clearly about whether they can accept the worst outcome of a trade, but that result was something even I couldn't accept. During that period, I was in the state I described with heart palpitations - couldn't walk normally on the street, and when opening exchange apps, regardless of price movement, I was completely numb.

Then there was $ORDI, which I held from 7U all the way down to 3U. This was another kind of torture - halving over six months, and with a large position. At the time, I had placed all my hopes on $ORDI,, which is actually a bad habit. Maybe it's because I'm too subjective - when trading, you can hear my strong approval and confidence in my own logic, but this characteristic is a double-edged sword, so when things go wrong, they go really wrong.

I was trapped in $ORDI for half a year, and everyone was criticizing, including Bitcoin OGs saying inscriptions had no value. You constantly question whether you were wrong. This time with $ACT was similar - three 80% drops in just half a month.

How did I get through it? I think there are several points:

First, I'm more optimistic than most people - I've always been more optimistic than 99% of people. This personality advantage really helped me, but even so, I still often felt pain to the point where I couldn't continue trading or even survive. But the sun will always come out, like I tweeted "no matter how deep the night, always believe dawn will come." I always believe I can stand up again because past experiences have told me countless times that I can stand up.

Second, seeking external help. For example, during the ORDI period, I wrote a tweet after watching the movie 'Oppenheimer,' which gave me some relief.

What kind of person was Oppenheimer? Good-looking, born rich, inherited the equivalent of over $100 million today from his father, and incredibly smart - entered Harvard at 16. This father of the atomic bomb who turned the tide of WWII, what was his early life like?

After watching the movie, I read all his materials. In his youth, he approached collapse multiple times - nearly tried to poison his tutor in England, felt abandoned when his best friend got a girlfriend, almost strangled his friend with a belt. He would collapse on the ground convulsing, foaming at the mouth. In his 20s, he would try to forcibly kiss young women on trains, all stemming from young male sexual repression plus the pain of unrecognized talent.

You can see that even such a person had such unbearable moments, looking almost like someone who should be locked up. But he eventually got through it. I found relief - everyone has their darkest moments, even those who seem especially great.

How am I better than Oppenheimer? 99.99% of people in this world would admit I'm not as good as him. How could I expect to endure less suffering than him and still get good results? It's impossible.

These are two directions - internal seeking and external seeking: internal seeking is enduring hardship, external seeking is finding some logic, facts, or others' experiences to find resonance.

The third point is to learn from lessons and not let yourself fall into that state again. There's a universal principle: before making a trade, ask yourself what's the worst case scenario, then ask yourself if you can accept this worst outcome with your current position size. If you can accept it, hold or buy; if you can't accept it, reduce position or don't buy.

These are the three most crucial points: seeking internally, seeking externally, and reflecting to avoid making the same mistakes.

The Three Laws of Bull Market Engines

TechFlow: You've proposed the Three Laws of Bull Market Engines. Could you explain these three laws in detail?

1. First Law: Old Technology, New Applications

Without this, the snow isn't sticky enough (insufficient fundamentals)

2. Second Law: New Narratives and New Hope

Without this, the slope isn't long enough

3. Third Law: Generate new assets at scale

Without this, the slope isn't wide enough

Only when all three conditions are met can we witness transformative market scenarios like those in 2017 & 2020.

0xWizard:

We often say "understanding history helps us see through the future." During the bear market, I was in pain and thinking about what a bull market would look like when it comes. We can only find answers from past bull markets, but not simply by copying ICO or DeFi models - we need to find commonalities between them.

The first law: Crypto always needs new narratives and new sectors. Because when discussing something people haven't seen before, its ceiling is unlimited. Whether it rises to $1 billion, $10 billion, or even $100 billion market cap, people can always find reasons to justify its value. But if you make another DeFi project now, why should it be worth $1 billion? It's not reasonable because previous DeFi projects are now worth less than $600 million. So you must have new sectors, new hope, new narratives.

This is also why when many communities approach me, I think they need to first understand whether their ceiling is high enough before engaging in community building. Having a strong community alone doesn't guarantee profits.

The second law: Long-term accumulation is needed. Whether it's ICO or DeFi, they all needed long periods of accumulation before explosive growth. For example, Ethereum took two to three years from launch to ICO prosperity. Looking at DeFi, when I did historical research, I found that Uniswap's concept (AMM) was proposed in late 2017/early 2018. Hayden built Uniswap based on this concept, and everyone acknowledges that DeFi's prosperity came because Uniswap allowed people to trade various tokens, which created lending demand and brought more capital. From concept proposal to real explosion took about two years of accumulation.

So this bull market's engine can't be new technology suddenly proposed now - it must be built on two to three years of past accumulation. Just like the Meme Coin Super Cycle, these were concepts proposed at the end of the last cycle, now seeing great prosperity. Whether it's AI Meme or inscriptions, they're essentially branches of Meme Coin prosperity, new ways of token production.

This is "old technology, new gameplay," but you can't completely copy previous models.

The third law: Must be able to generate new assets at scale. During the ICO period, tokens could be issued in mass, same with DeFi period, inscription period could produce over 20,000 inscription tokens per day, AI too - a bunch of AI agents appeared. Without new assets appearing, there's no spread effect. Imagine if during the ICO period there was only Ethereum, no NEO or other projects, would people go crazy? Wealth stories spread one after another.

This comes back to crypto's essence: Asset issuance. I've been in crypto for many years, from reading whitepapers in 2017-2018 until now, thinking back and forth, what makes crypto stronger than Web2 or the real world? It's Asset issuance - this regulatory arbitrage convenience hasn't been seen anywhere else.

To give a counter-example, projects like Pandora can't form mass similar assets. But AI agents are different - now AI agents are everywhere. Same with inscriptions - at that time, many projects were doing inscriptions. This kind of phenomenon can form shocking power.

These three laws combined are the real bull market engine. Just like when I heard $YFI had risen 10,000x in June 2020, that feeling of being shocked in my heart, immediately wanting to enter to make money. This is the result of new narrative, long-term accumulation, and mass new assets working together.

Understanding Narrative and Community

TechFlow: Looking through your Twitter history, the keywords "narrative" and "community" appear frequently. What do you understand an asset's narrative and community to be?

0xWizard:

Regarding narrative, my understanding is this: Looking at narrative requires going back to the furthest point of thinking. Don't just look at surface descriptive language - it's like they show you a tiger, but you need to distinguish whether it's a real tiger or a paper tiger, look at its flesh and bones. When I look at narratives, I always try to explore the underlying essence.

For example, when many people talk about AI agents, they all talk about what AI can do in the future. But I think you can't just think one step - you need to think two, three, four steps ahead of others. You need to first ask yourself: What's the essence of MEME? What's the essence of on-chain assets? Then think about what's the essence of the AI sector in crypto's secondary market? Only then can you understand the essence of AI MEME.

When I wrote the "AI Renaissance" article, some people said it was "grand but empty," but this is really the crystallization of my years of experience in crypto, conclusions derived from pushing up from the most fundamental essence.

If your narrative is built on sand, the tide will wash it away, but if built on granite, it's invincible.

This is my first principle about narrative: Always dig one layer, two layers, three layers deeper than others. Like Wittgenstein's semantic view in modern philosophy: Our language creates who we are, your way of thinking creates who you are. If you always follow others, that's not yourself. Like Euclid's Elements, first establish axioms, then derive theorems, finally reach conclusions.

Regarding community, I have two important views:

First, the best is a global community. While the Chinese-speaking community is indeed strong, a good target must have both English and Chinese communities being strong. The so-called English community actually includes Indians, Koreans, and many others in UTC+8 who communicate in English. English community alone isn't enough because the best investors and exchanges are in the Chinese community. But if there's only Chinese community, based on experience, the market cap ceiling is around $50-60 million, except for pioneering projects like ORDI.

Second, look at how many setbacks the community has experienced. Can't just look at rises, a group of people in Telegram shouting "BUY" and "TO THE MOON" - that's not community.

From day one in $ACT's English community, I was saying to understand what $ACT is, don't FOMO because of price. If you can't precipitate a group of believers as a long-term project, it's over. Communities that only believe in price scatter when it drops.

But if you have a group of "die-hard fans" like me, believing in their own logic, emotional connection to the community, secondary judgment and primary logic, even three 80% drops can't wash them away.

Good communities must be diverse, must have a group of people who truly believe in something.

What are bad communities? It's a small group of non-believers trying to deceive others, the deceived don't believe either but hope to deceive more people, finally becoming a race of who runs away first.

TechFlow: Last question, what advice do you have for users who want to make achievements on-chain now?

0xWizard:

About on-chain participation, there are several important principles:

1. Don't use large capital

2. The definition of large capital varies by person.

For example, if you have $100,000, use $10,000 to play; if you have $1 million, use $100,000-200,000 to play; if you have $10 million, use $1 million to play. In short, use funds you can afford to lose. This is because compared to traditional exchanges, on-chain exchanges have higher risks.

3. Determine your strategy

4. I wrote about three types of tradeable token strategies on Twitter. Many others are traps:

a) Hot tokens:

Like recent $PINUT, $LUCE, $BAN, etc., can quickly surge to $50-60 million or even over $100 million market cap. Key is judging how many people accept the narrative, how much heat it can generate. Generally, poor ones can surge to $30-50 million, good ones to $80-100 million. If you see it under $10 million, you can get in. But if it's already at $30 million, don't enter. Hot tokens usually drop 80% when they fall - you can enter at 80% drops, but be careful of traps.

Don't do All-in, place points at 80% drops for each hot token - win rate will be higher.

b) Blue chips & potential targets:

Like $ACT, $POPCAT, etc., didn't rise based on heat but experienced many setbacks and community consensus building processes. These tokens also often drop 80% but have strong vitality. Need to observe community more, think about your own logic, judge whether the project is feasible.

Each 80% drop is an opportunity to add positions, best entry timing is at several million to tens of millions market cap.

c) Large-cap blue chips:

Generally only play after listing on major exchanges. Logic becomes judging capital and sector weight - another type of secondary market play logic. Like I dared to take positions in $Neiro at $300 million market cap, I think $ACT still has big development space - all based on secondary logic. But must play ones listed on Binance. If it hasn't listed on Binance but reached $1 billion market cap, don't participate.

These principles and strategies are based on my years of experience and thinking. Everyone's standards may be different, but important is to have your own logic and judgment. Don't blindly follow trends, need to deeply think about the logic behind each trade.