TON生态链游BunnyBlitz指南如何解锁100万激励

链得得Published on 2024-07-26Last updated on 2024-07-29

Abstract

近日融资超 1000 万美元的 Web3 人才招聘平台 Bondex 在 TON 上线了一款链游「Bunny Blitz」，并推出了总额 100 万美元的激励计划的。

撰文：J1N，Techub News
近日融资超 1000 万美元的 Web3 人才招聘平台 Bondex 在 TON 上线了一款链游「Bunny Blitz」，并推出了总额 100 万美元的激励计划的。
Bondex 是一家 Web3 人才招聘平台，目前总融资额已超 1000 万美元，参投方包括 Animoca Brands、Morningstar、Dext Force Ventures 和 iAngels 等。并与币安、Blockchain.com、Chainlink、CoinMarketCap 和 Ankr 等建立了合作关系。
Bunny Blitz 游戏介绍
Bunny Blitz 是一款通过「点击屏幕赚钱」的 Telegram 小程序，玩家将通过点击屏幕、完成任务、升级兔子、使用 BOOST、购买使用更高级别兔子、以及邀请好友来瓜分价值 100 万美元的 BDXN 代币奖励。以下是新手游戏教程：
注册并登录

首先是安装 Web3 通讯必备的 Telegram
在 Telegram 中搜索 @bunnyblitz_bot 并点击开始聊天。
按照提示完成账户注册，你将获得一个虚拟的兔子角色，进行游玩。

了解游戏界面
游戏界面下方有四个板块，每个板块对应不同的功能，分别是：

首页（Home）：显示你当前的兔子角色、等级、每次点击的收益、升级所需的代币数量，以及每小时的利润。
收益（Earn）：查看当前持有的卡片和可购买的新卡片。卡片会增加每小时的利润。
好友（Friends）：邀请和管理你的好友，通过邀请好友可以获得额外奖励。
任务（Quests）：查看并完成游戏中的任务，获得额外的 BDNX 奖励。

零撸玩法
首先你需要做的是在 Home 页面中不断点击你的兔子角色。每次点击都会赚取一定数量的代币，初始每次点击可以获得 3 枚 BDNX 代币。
当你积累足够的 BDNX 代币后，可以通过升级角色等级来增加你的收益，每次升级都会增加每次点击的收益和每小时的利润。例如，当前等级 3，需要 9900 枚代币来升级到等级 4。
如果你觉得收益还不够，那就可以使用 BOOST 加速器，这会帮助你更快地提升角色等级和积累代币。但每天只有一次免费加速。
氪金玩法
在你熟悉玩法后，觉得收益还不够的话，你可以点开 Earn 页面。该页面可购买的更高级的兔子卡片。高级版卡片会增加你每小时的利润，比如购买 Degen Developer 卡片需要约 1 万枚 BDNX 代币，每小时可以增加约 1500 枚BDNX 代币的利润。
邀请好友获得更多奖励
和大部分链游一样，Bunny Blitz 通过邀请好友也可以获得奖励，邀请普通好友可以获得 100 枚 BDNX，邀请使用 Telegram Premium 的好友可以获得 250 枚 BDNX。
完成任务
在 Quests 页面，你可以查看当前可用的任务。完成这些任务可以获得额外的 BDNX 奖励。
游戏提示

定期升级：尽量保持升级角色，这样可以更快增加每次点击的收益。
完成任务：积极完成任务，可以获得额外的 BDNX 奖励，比如第一个任务就有 2 万枚代币奖励。
邀请好友：邀请更多好友加入游戏，不仅可以获得奖励，还能一起互动，增加游戏乐趣。

作者：TechubNews；来自链得得内容开放平台“得得号”，本文仅代表作者观点，不代表链得得官方立场凡“得得号”文章，原创性和内容的真实性由投稿人保证，如果稿件因抄袭、作假等行为导致的法律后果，由投稿人本人负责得得号平台发布文章，如有侵权、违规及其他不当言论内容，请广大读者监督，一经证实，平台会立即下线。如遇文章内容问题，请联系微信：chaindd123
链得得仅提供相关信息展示，不构成任何投资建议

Anthropic Employees Leave to Start a Business, Valued at $1 Billion, Also Focused on 'Recursive Self-Improvement'

Former Anthropic employees Behnam Neyshabur and Harsh Mehta have founded a startup named Mirendil, securing $200 million in seed funding at a $1 billion valuation from investors including Andreessen Horowitz, Kleiner Perkins, and NVIDIA. The company, staffed by researchers from Anthropic, xAI, Google DeepMind, and OpenAI, aims to accelerate scientific discovery by focusing on "recursive self-improvement" for AI. Their vision, described as "AI for AI for Science," is to build a platform enabling research labs in fields like medicine and materials science to develop and iteratively improve their own specialized AI models, rather than relying on general-purpose models from large tech firms. Neyshabur argues this approach, involving AI that can optimize its own code under human supervision, is the fastest path to AI-accelerated science. The founders believe a market opportunity exists because major AI companies, while increasingly using AI to advance their own research, restrict external developers from using their models to train competing products. Mirendil plans to release its first models soon to gather early user feedback, with the goal of empowering thousands of labs to tackle critical scientific challenges.

marsbit23m ago

Anthropic Employees Leave to Start a Business, Valued at $1 Billion, Also Focused on 'Recursive Self-Improvement'

marsbit23m ago

Trillion-Dollar Pension Fund Entry? Franklin Bitcoin Dividend Reinvestment ETF Comes with a Built-in Selling Pressure Ceiling

Franklin Templeton has filed to launch two ETFs that embed a "default configuration" logic into Bitcoin investment, aiming to tap into massive pension fund flows. These "Bitcoin Dividend Reinvestment Index ETFs" will initially hold 95% equities and 5% Bitcoin, automatically reinvesting stock dividends to buy Bitcoin. However, a quarterly rebalancing rule forces selling of Bitcoin if its allocation exceeds 5%, capping its maximum holding at 20%. While the product cleverly circumvents advisor reluctance and compliance hurdles by labeling itself as a U.S. equity product, its actual Bitcoin buying power is minimal. Given low dividend yields (e.g., ~1% for broad market indices), annual Bitcoin purchases from a fund the size of Franklin's existing Bitcoin ETF would be a mere $3.6 million—negligible against Bitcoin's daily trading volume. Crucially, during bull markets, the fund becomes a programmed, passive *seller* of Bitcoin, potentially creating sustained sell pressure if many similar funds emerge. The strategy leverages investor inertia and automatic enrollment, similar to the success of target-date funds in 401(k) plans. It also uses an offshore Cayman subsidiary for holding Bitcoin and raises a tax complication where investors must pay taxes on dividends they never receive as cash. Although recent U.S. regulatory changes allow crypto in retirement plans, widespread adoption as a default option faces legal hurdles. The core premise remains: the system doesn't need to convince anyone to buy Bitcoin actively; it simply relies on people doing nothing.

marsbit32m ago

Trillion-Dollar Pension Fund Entry? Franklin Bitcoin Dividend Reinvestment ETF Comes with a Built-in Selling Pressure Ceiling

marsbit32m ago

Bitcoin Hits 20-Month Low as Largest Bull Suffers $15 Billion Paper Loss

Bitcoin Hits 20-Month Low as Major Bull Loses $15 Billion On June 25th, Bitcoin fell below $60,000, hitting a low of $58,030—its lowest level since October 2024. The sell-off triggered over $1 billion in leveraged liquidations in 24 hours, with longs accounting for $788 million. This marks a more than 53% decline from the October 2025 all-time high of $126,198. A critical factor in the downturn is the weakening position of MicroStrategy, the largest corporate Bitcoin holder. With 847,363 BTC at an average cost of $75,651, the company now faces over $14.6 billion in unrealized losses. Its core financing flywheel—raising capital to buy Bitcoin—is stalling. Its variable-rate preferred shares (STRC), a key fundraising tool, have fallen 25% below their $100 target. This raises doubts about its ability to continue providing steady institutional demand for Bitcoin. Simultaneously, U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs are experiencing significant outflows, with a single-day net outflow of $469 million on June 24th. This represents the most severe sustained capital flight since their launch. The macroeconomic backdrop remains restrictive, with persistent inflation delaying expected Fed rate cuts. Analysts note a shift in capital allocation, with institutional funds moving away from crypto towards AI infrastructure stocks. Immediate pressure comes from approximately $10 billion worth of Bitcoin options expiring on June 26th, which could increase market volatility. The combined effect of these factors—eroding core demand pillars, macro headwinds, and capital rotation—has decisively broken the $60,000 support level.

Foresight News38m ago

Bitcoin Hits 20-Month Low as Largest Bull Suffers $15 Billion Paper Loss

Foresight News38m ago

STRC Falls Below $80, Can Conservative Investors Still Buy the Dip?

The article analyzes whether the STRC (a perpetual preferred stock issued by MicroStrategy) presents a buying opportunity after its price fell below its $100 par value to around $80, offering a seemingly high yield of 13-15%. The core argument is that STRC's discount reflects market skepticism about the sustainability of MicroStrategy's capital structure model, not just temporary panic. This model relies on issuing securities (like STRC) to raise funds to buy more Bitcoin, a "flywheel" that works in a bull market. The recent small sale of BTC to fund dividends, while minor, broke the psychological "never sell" anchor and signaled potential strain. Key risks identified are not a traditional Ponzi collapse but a potential breakdown in the financing narrative: 1) If Bitcoin enters a deep bear market, crushing MicroStrategy's stock premium (mNAV), its ability to raise cheap capital weakens. 2) If STRC remains deeply discounted, it signifies permanently higher funding costs. 3) The high cash dividend yield represents a significant ongoing expense. 4) If selling BTC to pay dividends becomes routine, the bullish narrative reverses. The conclusion is that STRC is not a risk-free high-yield asset. It is a high-coupon bet on whether MicroStrategy's BTC treasury financing model can withstand a bear market. Buying it is a wager that the market will continue to believe in and fund this structure at acceptable costs. The current price asks if this cycle's "casualty" might be a BTC treasury company's融资 model itself.

marsbit54m ago

STRC Falls Below $80, Can Conservative Investors Still Buy the Dip?

marsbit54m ago

Why Do Crypto Projects Keep Changing Their Names?

**Why Do Crypto Projects Keep Changing Names?** In the crypto world, changing a project's name is common—over 16% of projects have done so, including major ones like Polygon (formerly Matic Network). This contrasts sharply with traditional businesses, which fiercely protect brand equity. The core reason is that in crypto, brand loyalty is often weak. Users are frequently investors, airdrop hunters, or yield seekers, not traditional consumers. A name associated with price crashes, hacks, or failed narratives becomes a liability, not an asset. Renaming can be a strategic reset to shed this baggage. Name changes serve as a potent marketing tool. They can signal a genuine pivot in strategy or scope (e.g., EthSign dropping "Eth" as it expanded). However, they are often used to "narrative surf," rebranding to align with hot trends like AI, RWA, or the metaverse (e.g., Elrond → MultiversX). Critically, renaming is also a PR tactic to distance a project from past failures like security breaches (e.g., Anyswap → Multichain). The most significant risk emerges when a name change is coupled with a token migration or swap. This process can allow projects to reset exchange price charts, erase visible historical downtrends, and create an illusion of a fresh start. It often facilitates liquidity resets, where low float can be exploited for pumps. More alarmingly, migrations sometimes mask overhauls to tokenomics, introducing substantial new token supply through "ecosystem funds" or "node rewards," effectively diluting existing holders. The fundamental issue isn't renaming itself, which can be valid for strategic evolution. The problem is when it functions as an escape from history—a way to avoid accountability for past mistakes, failed promises, and poor performance. When a project announces a rebrand, the critical questions are: What tangible new capability or strategy does it represent? Has the tokenomics changed? And what part of its past is it most trying to make users forget?

marsbit1h ago

Why Do Crypto Projects Keep Changing Their Names?

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot

Futures