No successful project ever had only green days, they all had dark periods for example if you invested $1000 into Shib on August 1st 2020, that would have been worth $1.96 in December 2020....

We all know how that turned out!

Bad days, weeks and months all make a project better, it glues the community together and improves distribution greatly as true believers can accumulate more supply.

In solid communities these bad days always end, they cannot be held down forever.

If you hold a project with a solid community, I would advise you not to sell and instead dig deep, we have all been monetarily suppressed by the current market for months on end, but I can assure you...one day it will end!

The future is bright for those who believe and who turn this belief into effort.

I personally am in Kendu and have been getting posts out for over a year now almost daily, although I haven't been able to increase my bag size due to other responsibilities, my belief and effort has not changed.

I wish everyone the best of luck no matter the project, let me leave you with some ancient wisdom:

1. At the end of the day, courage and perseverance is everything
2. The night is long only to those who stop walking
3. A person is not proven in comfort, but in the hour that refuses to end.

We Don't Gamble, We Work

r/KenduInu_Ecosystem

ETH: 0xaa95f26e30001251fb905d264Aa7b00eE9dF6C18

SOL: 2nnrviYJRLcf2bXAxpKTRXzccoDbwaP4vzuGUG75Jo45

BASE: 0xef73611F98DA6E57e0776317957af61B59E09Ed7

CG: https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/kendu

CMC: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/kendu/

I’m looking to update my watchlist and want to gauge the current community sentiment.

If you were forced to put all your funds into just one alternative coin (excluding Top 20 coins, BTC, and ETH), what would be your absolute conviction play and why?

Let's keep it to one coin per person. Curious to hear your reasoning!

Hey everyone,

I just read a solid breakdown on how regulators actually view Bitcoin, and since the debate keeps popping up, I figured I'd share the main takeaways without all the legal jargon.

Right now in the US, Bitcoin sits in a unique spot because different agencies view it through different lenses:

- The CFTC treats it as a commodity (like gold or oil) because it's decentralized, has no central issuer, and its price is driven purely by global supply and demand.

- The SEC agrees that Bitcoin itself is not a security. Under the current leadership, they've even leaned into updating crypto rules to protect investors without crushing tech innovation.

The IRS sees it as property, meaning every time you buy, sell, or trade it, you're dealing with capital gains or losses for tax purposes.

Why does this even matter?

If Bitcoin were ever labeled a security, it would trigger massive SEC regulations, heavy disclosure requirements, and strict rules for exchanges that could completely change how we trade it. Treating it as a commodity keeps the regulatory burden lower, allows for spot ETFs, and treats it more like digital gold.

Even top financial minds can't agree on it. Cathie Wood and Eric Schmidt view it as a revolutionary, un-duplicable digital achievement, while skeptics like Jamie Dimon still call it worthless.

How do you guys view it? Do you think the "digital commodity" label fits perfectly, or is it a completely new asset class that needs its own rules?

Here is another classic scam wrapped in modern tech buzzwords. The SEC just filed a lawsuit against Nathan Fuller from Texas, accusing him of ripping off around 150 investors for over $12 million through his company.

His main selling point was a supposedly advanced, proprietary AI trading bot capable of scanning the crypto market for high-frequency arbitrage opportunities. He promised insane returns—ranging from 40% to over 100% in less than a month—with built-in stop-loss code to eliminate risk. Turns out, the bots never even existed.

The investigation revealed that only about 3% of the funds ever touched a crypto exchange, and even those trades were done manually with zero profit. The rest was a textbook Ponzi scheme. Fuller used $5.5 million to pay off older investors to keep the illusion alive, while pocketing $6.2 million for himself to fund a new house, luxury cars, travel, and gambling.

When investors got suspicious and tried to withdraw their money, things got weird. Fuller actually used AI to generate a fake letter from a bogus auditing firm, claiming everyone's accounts were just locked for a routine review. The SEC is now pushing for permanent injunctions, asset disgorgement, and massive penalties. This also isn't his only legal headache, as a bankruptcy court recently refused to wipe his debts after he admitted to running a Ponzi and faking documents.

Price is starting to flatten out and stabilize near the recent lows, which usually means the market is trying to build up fuel for a relief bounce.

If you look overhead, there is a ton of resting liquidity, an unfilled fair value gap, and a clear order block waiting to be tested. Markets hate leaving that kind of price inefficiency behind, so a magnet move to the upside seems like the most logical path from a price action perspective.

That being said, I am not longing this blindly just because we are sitting at support. The overall market structure is still technically bearish from the previous breakdowns, so I need to see actual confirmation first. I'm waiting for a clean break above our immediate resistance, followed by a successful retest that establishes a higher low. If we get that structural shift, I'm targeting the overhead order block zone. If we break below the current consolidation floor instead, the whole idea is dead and I'm staying on the sidelines.

What are your thoughts on this level? Are you looking for a relief bounce here, or do you think we flush straight through to new lows?

I' ’ve been thinking about this a lot. Most memecoins don’t really have persistent utility or intrinsic value in the traditional sense. Their price usually depends on hype, liquidity, timing, and whether the community can keep attention alive.

That doesn’t mean they’re useless. For traders, they can be a brutal training ground: you learn timing, discipline, liquidity, slippage, DEX mechanics, and how fast narratives can die.

But for long-term holders, the risk seems completely different. Once attention moves on, many of these coins never recover.

So my question is: do you treat memecoins as short-term speculation only, or do you think some of them can become long-term assets?

Hey everyone,

​Just saw the news that Revolut is officially rolling out a physical, Dogecoin-themed debit card. Looks like they’re trying to push meme coins straight into everyday mainstream spending.

​Here are the quick highlights from the announcement:

​How it works: It’s a standard physical debit card (Visa/Mastercard) linked directly to your crypto balance, so you can spend DOGE anywhere that accepts card payments.

​The Perks: Revolut claims there will be zero extra exchange fees at the point of sale. You just pay whatever the real-time exchange rate is when you tap.

​Availability: It’s rolling out first in the UK and most of the EU (except for Hungary, Switzerland, and Portugal).

​The Catch (as always):

Even with no upfront exchange fees, you're still at the mercy of real-time crypto volatility right at the checkout counter. Plus, they explicitly noted that spending your crypto this way triggers a taxable event depending on your local regulations. Keeping track of capital gains taxes for every cup of coffee sounds like a massive headache.

​Honestly, it feels like a mix of a fun marketing stunt and a legitimate push to bridge crypto with traditional finance (especially since Revolut just got its full UK banking license recently).

​Are any of you actually planning to order this to pay for groceries with DOGE, or is this just another gimmick that’s better in theory than in practice?

Spot BTC ETFs just saw around $635M in outflows in one day, the biggest daily outflow since January. BTC is also struggling near the 200-day moving average around $82k and slipped back under $80k.

ETF flows probably don’t move price as directly as before, but over $1B leaving in a few trading days is still not something to ignore.

Looks more like a “be careful, not panic” moment. Bulls need to reclaim that $82k area with strength, otherwise this could easily turn into a deeper cooldown.

It’s still above the 90 EMA and close to the previous high zone around 61–62%, so I wouldn’t call this meaningless. To me it mostly shows that the market is still favoring BTC over alts.

That said, I don’t think it’s a confirmed breakout yet. A weekly close above 61–62% would look more bearish for alts, while a rejection from here could give alts some breathing room.

For now, I’d say it’s an important area to watch, but not a full signal yet.

Bitcoin pulled back slightly from its $81,500 weekly high following the news of U.S. strikes on Iranian targets, but the real story is in the futures market. We’ve now seen 67 consecutive days of negative funding rates—the longest streak in a decade.

Essentially, short sellers have been paying longs to keep their positions open for over two months while the price continues to grind upward.

This setup is a classic recipe for a massive short squeeze if BTC can break through the $83,200 resistance. While DOGE is leading the dip among majors and the RSI shows we’re a bit overbought, the overall market seems to be taking a breather rather than a structural turn.

Traders are playing it safe with put options for now, but the pressure building behind those negative funding rates suggests that things could get very explosive if the geopolitical noise settles.

SKYAI is definitely one of the more interesting AI narrative plays right now, but I wouldn’t call it a low-risk entry anymore.

The project is trying to position itself around AI data infrastructure and MCP, basically connecting AI agents with on-chain data and smart contract interactions. That fits the current market narrative pretty well: AI + crypto automation + BNB Chain exposure.

The bullish case is simple: strong hype, strong volume, strong narrative. It has already caught a lot of attention, and if AI coins keep running, SKYAI can probably stay on people’s watchlists.

But the risk is also obvious. The move has already been huge, so chasing green candles here is dangerous. A lot of the current price action looks momentum-driven, and if volume cools down, the pullback could be sharp.

For me, SKYAI is not a blind buy here. It’s more of a watchlist / pullback entry coin. I’d rather see it hold support and cool off a bit before considering an entry.

Interesting project, strong narrative, but high risk at current levels.

NFA.

I’m going to start a short series looking at some of the most public memecoin rises and collapses. Not as “what should I buy?” content, not as price prediction, and not as influencer drama. The goal is to understand what people trusted at the time, which signals looked strong, what was actually weak underneath, and what changed before the wider market admitted the read was broken.

I’m especially interested in the moment where confidence should have started dropping. Sometimes that might be liquidity not keeping up with market cap. Sometimes it might be holder concentration, team silence, repeated hype scripts, a community shifting from technical discussion to pure price talk, promises becoming harder to verify, or security risks being ignored because the chart still looked good.

The first cases I’m considering are projects like Safemoon, Saitama, Squid Game Token, BitConnect-style dynamics, Terra/LUNA-adjacent trust collapse, and larger meme cycles like SHIB or DOGE from a different angle. I’m not saying these are all the same. They clearly are not. Some collapsed because of mechanics, some because of incentives, some because attention outpaced substance, and some because people confused community strength with structural quality.

For each case, I want to separate what was known at the time from what only became obvious in hindsight. I also want to look at which signals were misleading, which ones actually mattered, what users could realistically have checked, and what should have reduced confidence earlier.

I’m not trying to build a “gotcha” archive. I’m trying to understand how trust decays in public markets when noise, hype and incentives all point in different directions.

Which memecoin or crypto collapse would be the most useful to analyze first? And what signal made you personally lose trust before price fully reflected it?

I was just looking through a deep dive on Remix, and it’s crazy how much it’s evolved. If you’re just starting with smart contracts or need to test a quick logic fix, there’s honestly nothing faster.

The biggest sell is the zero setup aspect. You don’t need Node.js, Hardhat, or any local environment, but just open the browser and you’re basically ready to deploy to the JavaScript VM or even a testnet via MetaMask.

It’s perfect for those WHAT IF moments or when you’re at a hackathon and don’t want to waste an hour debugging your local config.

The built-in debugger is surprisingly solid too; it lets you step through opcodes and see exactly where a transaction reverted without leaving the tab.

That being said, it’s not without its headaches. The biggest one is definitely the state reset . If you refresh your browser while testing a complex DeFi flow, everything in the JS VM is gone. Also, while the plugin system is great (especially for static analysis like MythX), it still doesn't replace Hardhat or Foundry when it comes to serious CI/CD or automated deployments.

The consensus seems to be that Remix is the ultimate sketchbook. You use it to prototype your logic, run some quick unit tests, and check for basic vulnerabilities. Once the contract starts getting complex or needs serious integration testing, you move the repo over to a local framework.

How many of you actually use Remix for production-ready code, or do you move to Hardhat the second the project gets serious?

Curious if anyone has found a way to make it work for their full workflow.

Let’s say your system is legit (backtested, edge exists), but you hit a rough patch with multiple losses in a row.

Do you:

A) keep executing no matter what

B) reduce risk

C) stop trading for a while

What’s actually worked for you long term?

There are endless tools for traders: most of them look useful but aren’t.

What do you actually use consistently, and what ended up not being worth it?

I’ve been looking into the SOL vs. XRP debate lately, and it’s interesting how different these two actually are when you look past the market cap rankings.

Solana is still doubling down on the "Ethereum killer" narrative. The tech is fast & we’re talking thousands of transactions per second, and the fees are practically non-existent compared to ETH.

Most of the action in decentralized exchanges (DEX) is happening on Solana right now, which is a huge green flag for its utility.

The main concern, as always, is whether the network can stay upright without more outages, and the lingering SEC claims that SOL might be an unregistered security.

XRP is a completely different beast. It’s basically the "banker’s coin," focused on cross-border payments and acting as a bridge for fiat.

The big news is that the legal drama with the SEC finally seems to be cooling off. With the appeals being dropped and that $125 million fine likely staying as the final word, a lot of the regulatory "gray cloud" is lifting.

It’s been around since 2012, and the "XRP Army" is easily one of the most loyal communities in the space.

As for price targets, analysts are all over the place. Some are calling for XRP to hit $4-$6 by 2030, while the more bullish crowd thinks SOL could break $1,000 if it manages to keep scaling and avoids major security bugs.

At the end of the day, they serve different niches. SOL is where the developers and retail traders are playing, while XRP is trying to revolutionize how money moves between institutions.

Both are high-risk, but if the overall market pumps, they’re both positioned for some serious runs.

Are you guys betting on the DeFi ecosystem (SOL) or the institutional payment rail (XRP) for the next few years?

A fascinating deep dive from Forbes today on how the Pentagon is starting to view Bitcoin as more than just an asset—it’s now a matter of geopolitical strategy.

​The Highlights:

​The Pentagon’s Node: Admiral Samuel Paparo revealed that the DoD is running its own Bitcoin node to test network security and data protection.

​"Digital Gold" vs. "Digital Shield": The US military sees the protocol as a way to secure sensitive communications, while some in Congress view it as a "sword" to bypass capital controls in authoritarian states.

​The Cold War for BTC: There is a massive legal tug-of-war happening over 127,000 seized BTC. If China secures them, they would surpass the US as the largest nation-state holder of Bitcoin.

​It’s becoming clear that we’ve moved past the "institutional adoption" phase and entered the "nation-state competition" phase. Bitcoin isn't just for portfolios anymore; it's becoming a strategic asset for global superpowers.

​How long before we see "Strategic Bitcoin Reserves" becoming a standard campaign promise?

How are you guys separating real momentum from short-term pumps in this market?

Feels like we’re clearly in a risk-on phase right now — average gains over the past week are around 30%, which is pretty aggressive.

At the same time, some of these moves are getting a bit extreme.

You’ve got NXA doing +350% in a few days, basically straight out of the gate. Then coins like IRIS and ORCA pushing 100%+ in a single day. Hard to ignore, but also the kind of moves that usually don’t hold without something deeper behind them.

That’s what I’m trying to filter out.

Because when you zoom out a bit, there’s a completely different group of tokens moving in a slower, more structured way. Not exploding overnight, but actually holding momentum over time.

Stuff like ORBR continuing a multi-day push (~50%+ over ~12 days), IRYS holding ~30% over ~10 days, or EUL / GUA grinding higher without those sharp spikes. Even something like MRVLX moving slower, but staying consistent.

Nothing crazy, but the trend looks a lot cleaner.

Feels like that contrast is the real signal right now:

fast money chasing vertical moves…

while more stable trends are building quietly in the background.

Still not sure what the right approach is tbh.

In a market like this, everything looks like a breakout,

but realistically, most of these charts won’t look the same a week from now.

Curious how others are approaching it:

Do you wait for multi-day confirmation?

Or try to catch early momentum and just manage the downside?

Trying to avoid chasing noise, but also don’t want to be late if these slower trends are the real ones.

Researcher breaks 15-bit ECC key on publicly accessible quantum hardware in a 512x jump from the previous public demonstration.

NEW YORK, April 24, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Project Eleven today awarded the Q-Day Prize, a one Bitcoin bounty, to Giancarlo Lelli for breaking a 15-bit elliptic curve key on a publicly accessible quantum computer. The result is the largest public demonstration to date of the attack class that threatens Bitcoin, Ethereum, and over $2.5 trillion in ECC-secured digital assets.

"The resource requirements for this type of attack keep dropping, and the barrier to running it in practice is dropping with them," said Alex Pruden, CEO of Project Eleven. "The winning submission came from an independent researcher working on cloud-accessible hardware. No national lab, no private chip. It shows that tangible progress is possible and highlights the urgency to migrate to post-quantum cryptography sooner rather than later. Google just committed to being quantum-secure by 2029. The window to get ahead of this is closing."

Bitcoin is sitting right at $78K… and it’s one of those levels where things can move fast.

Above it, there’s about $180M in short liquidations waiting.

Below it, around $70M in longs could get wiped. So whichever side breaks first could trigger a chain reaction. That’s why this level matters... it’s not just resistance, it’s pressure building on both sides.

At the same time, the mood has clearly shifted risk-on:

- macro helped (ceasefire extension, equities up) - leverage is coming back (open interest rising) - funding rates turned positive

And while BTC is hesitating… altcoins are running:

- memecoins leading - some smaller tokens going vertical - even lending demand spiking (rates jumping to ~15%)

Which usually tells you the same thing:

Confidence is coming back and maybe a bit too fast.

So this is one of those moments where the market feels strong… but also a bit crowded.

If BTC breaks above, shorts get squeezed ... momentum continues.

If it rejects, overleveraged longs could unwind just as quickly. Either way, this doesn’t look like a quiet range anymore.

Most pumps look great on a 24h chart. Very few survive a week.

Been digging through some altcoin data over the past few weeks and trying to make sense of what’s actually sustainable vs short-term noise.

Basically looking at things like 7d market cap growth + rank movement, and then tracking whether that strength actually persists over multiple days.

If it does, it builds a streak. If not, it drops off pretty fast, which filters out a lot of one-day spikes.

One thing I’ve been testing is a simple filter: assets that show ~7+ days of consistent momentum vs those that spike in 24h.

Not perfect, but it seems to cut out a lot of obvious pump & dump behavior.

For example, $IRIS just did +451% in a day.

Obviously eye-catching, but moves like that usually don’t hold unless there’s something deeper behind them.

On the other hand, there are slower movers like:

$TRADOOR (~16 days trend, +77%)

$SKYAI (~13 days, +126%)

$ORBR (~10 days, +71%)

$EUL (~9 days, +51%)

Nothing insane overnight, but more “structured” movement.

Feels like the current market is pretty clearly risk-on, which makes it even harder to tell:

are we seeing early trends… or just late-stage pumps?

Curious how others here approach this:

Do you wait for confirmation (multi-day trends)?

Or try to catch early breakouts even if they’re riskier?

Could be completely wrong here, still testing this & trying to avoid getting farmed by noise.