FTX官宣不会重启,FTT重生之我是meme

Odaily星球日报Publicado a 2024-02-02Actualizado a 2024-02-02

Resumen

好消息:全额赔付。坏消息:按照22年11月的价格计算。

原创|Odaily星球日报

作者|jk

FTX官宣不会重启,FTT重生之我是meme

美国当地时间 1 月 31 日周三,已破产的加密货币交易所 FTX 向法庭表示预计能够全额偿还其客户。这一声明是通过法庭听证会公布的,美国破产法官 John Dorsey 已初步批准了这个日期,尽管有相当一部分债权人人对此表示不认同。

根据法庭程序,FTX 放弃了重新启动其平台的计划,转而专注于全额偿还其前客户。根据法庭程序,FTX 由于缺乏买家而放弃了重新启动其平台的计划。顾问们在市场上进行了很彻底的搜寻,以找到愿意重启 FTX 的投资者,但没有人愿意提供重启交易所所需的现金。

FTX 律师 Andrew Dietderich 表示,偿还过程将要求索赔人提交证明,以验证他们确实持有并在 FTX 上损失了资产。这一过程将由重组顾问审查。

平台币 FTT 还有用吗?

FTX 的原生代币 FTT 在公司的这一计划公布后短暂上涨,但随后急剧下跌。几日前,FTT 的价格一直在 2.65 美元左右短暂波动,然而如今已经来到了 1.91 美元左右,最低点来到了 1.65 美元, 7 日跌幅达到了 27.04% 。

FTX官宣不会重启,FTT重生之我是meme

FTT 走势,来源:Coinmarketcap

这一市场反应实际上是可以期待的。按照此前期待重启的剧本而言,FTT 的升值是基于 FTX 重启之后仍然有可能重新启用 FTT 作为原生代币,或者是按照一部分比例去兑换 FTT 用来发布新的原生代币。然而,这一预期随着 FTX 宣布不会重启而破灭;在放弃重启以后,FTT 事实上已经找不到新的用途,且随着 FTX 不断清算资产用以赔付客户,FTT 的价值必然随着抛售进一步下跌。

按照最坏的预期来看,FTT 可能终究会成为如同 Terra 崩溃后的 Luna Classic 一样,成为事实上的 memecoin,跟随每次相关新闻的出现而波动,但已经极大概率无法回到当年的高点了。

全额赔付:是个好消息,但是是以什么时间点的资产价格赔付?

FTX 之前报告称,有超过 36, 000 项索赔,总额约为 160 亿美元。去年,它表示只能赔偿大约 90% 的客户。而现在,打算全额赔付客户自然是一个更好的消息,不过也有一个随之而来的问题;FTX 很可能不能按照原有的代币种类赔付给客户,那么如果按照美元价值赔付的话,依据的是什么时间点的美元价值?

若是在 FTX 崩溃前,比特币的价值是 2 万美元左右。若是按照 FTX 宣布破产的时间,比特币的价值则来到了 16000 美元左右,而如今则是 43000 美元左右,差值巨大。“其中许多索赔是基于那个动荡时期货币价值大幅下降的情况提出的,”FTX 债权人委员会律师 Kris Hansen 在周三的听证会上说。

而根据彭博社报道,美国破产法官 John Dorsey 裁定,每项索赔的规模将基于 FTX 申请破产当日所欠客户或债权人的金额。Dorsey 还批准了估算每个债权人和客户所欠金额的规则。一些客户抱怨,将他们的索赔固定在 2022 年底的价格上,会导致他们错过数字资产价格上涨的机会。Dorsey 裁定,破产规则要求公司的债务必须与其申请法院保护的日期挂钩。所以,这一点与之前 Odaily 报道的 FTX 曾提议过的索赔价值相似,按照的是比特币在 16000 美元左右的价格进行赔付,而这无疑将会对债权人带来很大的损失。

而从好的方面想,如果不是从 2023 年开始的这一轮小牛市,FTX 破产后剩余的加密货币资产未必足够它偿还所有的投资者。也就是说,按照近日的价格来偿还已经是几乎不可能的事情,但是这一轮升值才让 FTX 按照 2022 年 11 月的价格赔付变得可能。

“我希望法庭和利益相关者理解这不是一个保证,而是一个目标,”Dietderich 说。“在我们和这个结果之间还有大量的工作和风险。但我们相信这个目标是可达到的,并且我们有实现它的策略。”

Lecturas Relacionadas

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

The article argues that blockchain's fundamental limitation is not the scalability trilemma (decentralization, scalability, security), which has been largely solved, but the lack of **privacy** and, until recently, clear **legitimacy**. Blockchain is described as a slow, expensive, globally shared computer whose core value is censorship resistance and verifiability. While ideal for native digital assets like money (e.g., stablecoins), its default transparency acts as a **tax**, exposing all transactions and enabling MEV extraction, which deters serious institutional capital. Simultaneously, its permissionless nature created regulatory ambiguity. The piece contends that **privacy** is the missing critical feature. It rejects the false choice between total transparency and complete anonymity. Modern cryptography (like zero-knowledge proofs) enables **compliant privacy**: users can prove facts (solvency, KYC status, compliance) without revealing the underlying sensitive data (specific holdings, identities). This preserves auditability for regulators and eliminates the leak of financial information. With recent regulatory progress (e.g., the GENIUS Act) addressing legitimacy, adding default, provably compliant privacy becomes a pure upgrade. It transforms blockchain from a costly, public ledger into a confidential settlement layer, finally bridging the gap to mainstream institutional and individual adoption of on-chain finance.

链捕手Hace 8 min(s)

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

链捕手Hace 8 min(s)

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

The global optical chip industry is experiencing a massive wave of expansion driven by surging AI data center demand. Major players across the US, Japan, Europe, and China are aggressively investing to ramp up production capacity. In the US, Coherent is expanding its 6-inch Indium Phosphide (InP) semiconductor fab in Texas, supported by CHIPS Act funding and a $2 billion strategic investment from NVIDIA. Lumentum is building a new factory for InP optical devices, and Nokia is scaling its advanced photonic chip packaging and testing capabilities. NVIDIA's investments aim to secure future supply of critical lasers and optical interconnect products for AI infrastructure. Japan's JX Advanced Metals, a leading InP substrate supplier, plans a multi-billion yen investment to increase its capacity 7-10 times, strengthening its grip on the crucial upstream materials market. In Europe, IQE and Tower Semiconductor settled a patent dispute and signed a multi-year InP epitaxial wafer supply agreement, highlighting that next-generation silicon photonics platforms will integrate high-performance InP components. STMicroelectronics and Sivers Semiconductors are also expanding silicon photonics production and partnerships. China is rapidly building out its domestic supply chain. Dongshan Precision's subsidiary, Source Photonics, announced a $12 billion project to expand optical chip and module production. Companies like Sanan Optoelectronics and Yunnan Germanium are scaling up InP chip manufacturing and substrate production, moving towards vertical integration from materials to modules. While debate continues around the exact future architecture—whether CPO (Co-Packaged Optics), NPO, or pluggables will dominate—analysts like Morgan Stanley argue the underlying driver is unchangeable: the explosive growth in bandwidth demand. This will inevitably increase the volume of optical engines, lasers, and related content per GPU, regardless of the final technical path. The competition for "more light" in the AI era has intensified into a global, full-chain capacity race.

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

Stablecoin Real Yield Found: A Deep Dive into On-Chain Reinsurance with Re's Karan Saroya As stablecoin supply exceeds $170 billion, the search for sustainable, non-speculative yield intensifies. Re, an on-chain reinsurance platform, provides an answer: connecting stablecoin capital to the trillion-dollar traditional reinsurance market. Re operates as a regulated reinsurer, accepting stablecoin deposits as collateral to back US insurance companies. These insurers pay premiums, generating yield that flows back to on-chain depositors. Currently supporting 35 insurers and underwriting $500 million, Re projects scaling to over $1 billion soon. Key insights from a Bankless podcast with founder Karan Saroya and investor Avichal of Electric Capital: 1. **Uncorrelated, Real-World Yield:** Re offers stablecoin holders access to reinsurance returns (targeting 12-14%+), an asset class entirely separate from crypto or equity markets. 2. **Operational Efficiency via Smart Contracts:** Re replaces traditional, labor-intensive capital fundraising with smart contracts, allowing a ~12-person team to compete with industry giants. 3. **Regulatory Leverage:** For every $1 of collateral, regulations allow backing $5-7 in written premiums. This leverage amplifies returns from the underlying risk-free rate. 4. **DeFi Integration:** Depositors receive receipt tokens, which can be used in protocols like Morpho for "looping," potentially pushing yields to 18-20%+. 5. **The "DeFi Mullet" Model:** A compliant front-end (regulated reinsurer) paired with a decentralized back-end (smart contracts, DeFi capital markets). 6. **RE Governance Token:** Modeled on Lloyd's of London, the token governs the central capital pool's allocation, counterparty acceptance, and parameters. 7. **Real Economic Impact:** Capital funds real-world productivity (factories, clinics, businesses) via insurance, moving beyond crypto's internal loops. The discussion highlights a pivotal moment: DeFi's supply-side infrastructure is now met by real demand for productive yield, potentially kickstarting a flywheel where vast on-chain stablecoin capital seeks these real-world returns.

链捕手Hace 3 hora(s)

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

链捕手Hace 3 hora(s)

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

"1996 or 1999? Wall's First Big Test Is 'How to View AI'" Federal Reserve Chairman Wall's initial challenge is not whether to raise or cut rates, but a more fundamental judgment: what kind of boom is the current AI boom? This will determine the Fed's policy path and define his legacy. Economics is split between two opposing views, according to reporter Nick Timiraos. One sees imminent productivity gains that will increase supply and cool inflation, allowing the Fed to hold steady. The other argues that while productivity benefits are distant, demand shocks are here now, and waiting for data confirmation risks missing the intervention window, forcing sharper rate hikes later. Wall has signaled a leaning toward the first view, echoing 1996-era Alan Greenspan, who embraced strong, productivity-driven growth without fear of inflation. However, Wall faces a different macro environment than Greenspan did, with tariff pressures, expanding fiscal deficits, and diminishing globalization benefits, which could force more significant inflation pressures even if AI benefits materialize. Wall's logic, expressed before taking office, is that AI-driven productivity gains won't show in official data for years. If the Fed waits for confirmation, it might mistakenly tighten policy and choke off the very growth that could suppress inflation. This argues for using forward-looking narratives over lagging data. Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee presents a key counter-argument. He distinguishes between expected and unexpected productivity booms. A widely anticipated boom, like the current AI wave, can cause people to spend future wealth gains in advance, overheating the economy before productivity actually rises, thus requiring preemptive rate hikes. He cites rising costs for AI data centers as evidence of such overheating. Fed Governor Christopher Waller offers a rebuttal to Goolsbee, noting the "expected spending" mechanism only works if people can borrow against future income, which many households cannot do due to borrowing constraints. Wall also faces a paradox related to his desire to reduce the Fed's use of "forward guidance" (pre-announcing policy moves). This practice was established in 1999 when Greenspan began signaling hikes to avoid market shocks. If the economy follows a less optimistic path, Wall may be forced to choose between using the guidance he wants to abolish or risking market volatility by staying silent. The ultimate question defining Wall's first major test remains: Is this 1996 or 1999?

marsbitHace 4 hora(s)

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

marsbitHace 4 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片