CoinTalk
A total of 2535 cryptocurrency questions
Share Your Thoughts with BYDFi
Trending
Aave Shifts Back to DeFi, Transfers Lens Leadership to Mask Network
Aave Steps Back as Lens Enters a New Era Under Mask Network
The decentralized finance giant Aave is redefining its priorities once again. In a strategic shift that signals a renewed commitment to its DeFi roots, Aave has officially handed over the stewardship of Lens Protocol to Mask Network. Rather than an exit or acquisition, the move represents a recalibration of roles, allowing Lens to evolve faster on the consumer side while Aave concentrates on protocol-level innovation.
The transition marks an important moment for decentralized social infrastructure, especially as competition intensifies across Web3 social platforms. Lens, long positioned as a foundational layer rather than a consumer-facing app, is now preparing for its next phase of growth with Mask Network at the helm of product execution.
Why Aave Is Refocusing on Core DeFi Infrastructure
Aave founder Stani Kulechov confirmed that Aave will significantly narrow its involvement with Lens, shifting into a technical advisory role. The decision reflects Aave’s intention to concentrate its resources on decentralized finance, lending markets and protocol scalability rather than managing social applications.
From Aave’s perspective, Lens has reached a level of maturity where infrastructure stewardship no longer requires direct operational leadership. By stepping back from day-to-day execution, Aave is reinforcing its long-standing philosophy of building open systems and allowing specialized teams to drive adoption and innovation on top of them.
This approach mirrors a broader trend across Web3, where protocols increasingly separate infrastructure from user-facing products in order to scale more efficiently.
Mask Network Takes Control of the User Experience
With the handover complete, Mask Network now assumes responsibility for advancing Lens at the application layer. This includes shaping the product roadmap, refining user experience, guiding design decisions and overseeing the operational direction of social applications built on the Lens ecosystem.
Mask Network brings extensive experience in integrating blockchain features into social and messaging platforms, positioning it as a natural fit to drive Lens toward broader consumer adoption. Applications like Orb and future Lens-based products will now be developed with a sharper focus on usability, distribution and mainstream accessibility.
Despite the leadership shift, Lens remains fully open-source and permissionless. The protocol’s onchain social graph, profiles, follows and smart contracts continue to belong to the ecosystem rather than any single entity.
Lens Remains Infrastructure, Not a Platform
From the beginning, Lens was never intended to compete with traditional social networks as a standalone platform. Launched by Aave in 2022, the protocol was designed to give users ownership of their social identities and content through blockchain-based profiles and NFTs.
That vision has remained consistent. Lens exists as a shared social layer where multiple applications can coexist, interact and grow without locking users into a single interface. This structure allows developers to avoid the cold start problem, since new apps can immediately tap into an existing social graph rather than building an audience from scratch.
By transferring stewardship to Mask Network while preserving open access, Lens strengthens its original mission as neutral social infrastructure rather than a branded front-end product.
Vitalik Buterin Weighs In on the Future of Decentralized Social
Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin publicly welcomed the transition, praising Aave’s stewardship of Lens and expressing optimism about what lies ahead. According to Buterin, decentralized social networks are essential for improving online discourse, precisely because they allow multiple clients to build on top of a shared data layer.
In 2026, Buterin himself has returned to decentralized social platforms, noting that his activity now flows through multi-client tools such as Firefly, which support Lens alongside Farcaster, X and Bluesky. His comments underscore a growing belief that the future of social media lies not in single dominant platforms, but in interoperable ecosystems driven by open data.
What This Means for Web3 Users and Investors
The Lens transition reflects a larger maturation of the Web3 space. Infrastructure protocols are becoming more focused, while consumer products are increasingly led by teams specialized in user adoption and experience. For users, this separation promises better-designed applications without compromising decentralization.
For investors and traders following the evolution of Web3 ecosystems, such structural shifts often signal long-term confidence rather than retreat. Platforms like BYDFi, which provide access to major DeFi tokens and emerging Web3 projects, allow users to track and trade assets connected to these evolving narratives. As decentralized social and DeFi continue to intersect, staying informed through reliable trading platforms becomes increasingly important.
A Strategic Shift, Not a Step Back
Ultimately, Aave’s decision to hand Lens stewardship to Mask Network is not about abandonment, but focus. By narrowing its role to protocol-level advisory work, Aave reinforces its identity as a DeFi infrastructure leader. At the same time, Lens gains a dedicated steward committed to pushing consumer adoption forward.
As decentralized social continues to mature, this transition may be remembered as a pivotal moment where infrastructure and product execution finally found their optimal balance.
2026-01-26 · 9 days ago0 044Pendle Revamps Governance Token to Address Low User Adoption
Pendle Unveils a New Governance Era as sPENDLE Replaces vePENDLE
Decentralized finance protocol Pendle is entering a new phase of its evolution after announcing a major overhaul of its governance model, replacing the long-standing vePENDLE token with a new, more flexible asset called sPENDLE. The change comes as the team acknowledges that, despite Pendle’s impressive growth, its previous governance design failed to achieve broad user participation.
The transition marks one of the most significant tokenomic updates in Pendle’s history and reflects a wider trend across DeFi: simplifying governance, improving liquidity, and lowering barriers for everyday users.
Why Pendle Is Moving Away From vePENDLE
Pendle’s original governance system was built around vePENDLE, a vote-escrow token that required users to lock their PENDLE for long periods of time. While the model was intended to encourage long-term alignment with the protocol, it ultimately created friction for most participants.
According to the Pendle team, long lock-up durations, non-transferability, and limited interoperability made vePENDLE unattractive to a large segment of users. Governance participation also required weekly engagement and a deep understanding of DeFi mechanics, which concentrated rewards among a small group of advanced participants.
This complexity became increasingly misaligned with Pendle’s expanding user base and growing total value locked, prompting the team to rethink how governance and incentives should function.
Introducing sPENDLE: A More Liquid Governance Token
The newly announced sPENDLE token is designed to address these shortcomings by introducing liquidity and flexibility into Pendle’s governance framework. Unlike vePENDLE, sPENDLE is a liquid staking and governance token that allows holders to exit their position with a 14-day withdrawal period, or immediately by paying a small fee.
This shift removes the psychological and financial burden of long-term lock-ups, making governance participation more accessible to both retail users and institutions. The Pendle team believes that lowering exit friction will significantly improve adoption and engagement across the ecosystem.
Staking for sPENDLE is set to go live shortly, while new vePENDLE locks will be paused ahead of a snapshot that will facilitate the transition.
Interoperability and DeFi Integration Take Center Stage
One of the most critical limitations of vePENDLE was its lack of interoperability. Because the token was non-transferable, it could not be used across other DeFi platforms, limiting its utility beyond Pendle’s own ecosystem.
sPENDLE changes that dynamic entirely. The new token is designed to integrate with multiple DeFi protocols, opening the door to use cases such as restaking, composable yield strategies, and broader liquidity participation. This aligns Pendle with a growing movement toward modular DeFi, where assets are expected to function seamlessly across platforms.
For traders and investors who already operate across multiple ecosystems, this change significantly increases the attractiveness of holding PENDLE.
A Simpler Governance Model Focused on Real Decisions
Pendle is also redesigning how governance itself works. Under the new structure, token holders will no longer be required to participate in weekly votes to remain eligible for rewards. Instead, governance participation will focus only on major protocol decisions, known as Pendle Protocol Proposals.
When no critical proposal is active, holders will automatically remain eligible for governance rewards without taking any action. This approach aims to strike a balance between meaningful decentralization and user convenience, ensuring that governance rewards are no longer limited to a small, highly technical minority.
Revenue Buybacks and Long-Term Incentives
To further strengthen the new model, Pendle plans to allocate up to 80% of its protocol revenue toward PENDLE token buybacks, which will then be distributed as governance rewards. This mechanism directly links protocol performance to token holder incentives, reinforcing long-term alignment without forcing users into rigid lock-ups.
With Pendle reportedly generating tens of millions of dollars in revenue, this buyback-driven reward system could become a powerful driver of sustainable value for holders under the new sPENDLE framework.
Pendle’s Position in the DeFi Market
Despite its governance challenges, Pendle has grown into one of the largest DeFi platforms by total value locked, ranking among the top protocols in the sector with billions of dollars secured on-chain. The governance revamp suggests that Pendle is now prioritizing scalability of participation, not just scalability of capital.
If successful, the sPENDLE transition could serve as a blueprint for other DeFi protocols struggling with low governance engagement.
Tracking PENDLE and DeFi Tokens on BYDFi
As governance innovation continues across DeFi, many traders prefer using flexible and advanced trading platforms to gain exposure to tokens like PENDLE. Platforms such as BYDFi provide access to a wide range of crypto assets, market analysis tools, and derivatives trading options, making them a practical choice for users looking to trade or hedge DeFi-related tokens.
For investors monitoring Pendle’s transition and broader DeFi governance trends, BYDFi offers a streamlined environment to track price movements, manage risk, and explore emerging opportunities without the complexity often associated with decentralized interfaces.
A Strategic Reset With Broader Implications
Pendle’s move from vePENDLE to sPENDLE is more than a technical upgrade—it is a strategic reset that acknowledges the realities of user behavior in modern DeFi. By prioritizing liquidity, interoperability, and simplified governance, Pendle is positioning itself for its next stage of growth.
Whether sPENDLE delivers the adoption boost Pendle expects will become clearer in the months ahead. However, one thing is certain: governance models that prioritize usability and flexibility are quickly becoming the standard in decentralized finance.
2026-01-26 · 9 days ago0 044US Senate Panel Pushes to Remove Developer Protections From Crypto Bill
US Senate Judiciary Pushes Back Against Crypto Developer Protections
A growing divide within the US Senate is threatening to reshape the future of crypto regulation, as top lawmakers from both parties move to strip developer safeguards from a key digital asset bill. The dispute highlights rising concerns that proposed protections could unintentionally weaken law enforcement’s ability to combat illicit financial activity in decentralized crypto markets.
At the center of the debate is the Senate’s long-anticipated crypto market structure legislation, which aims to clarify how regulators oversee digital assets and blockchain-based platforms. However, Senate Judiciary Committee leaders argue that parts of the bill could open dangerous loopholes for criminals operating through decentralized systems.
Bipartisan Warning From the Senate Judiciary Committee
Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Charles Grassley and the committee’s senior Democrat, Richard Durbin, issued a rare bipartisan warning to leaders of the Senate Banking Committee. In a letter sent to Banking Chair Tim Scott and ranking member Elizabeth Warren, the lawmakers urged major revisions to the bill’s language.
According to Grassley and Durbin, the current draft risks undermining long-standing unlicensed money transmitter laws by shielding certain crypto developers and network operators from liability. They warned that this could severely limit the government’s ability to pursue bad actors who exploit decentralized platforms for illegal purposes.
The letter, first reported by Politico, described the proposed protections as creating a significant enforcement gap that sophisticated criminal organizations could take advantage of.
Lawmakers Fear Criminal Exploitation of Decentralized Platforms
Grassley and Durbin emphasized that criminal groups already rely on advanced methods to hide illegal transactions, including the use of complex financial structures and anonymizing technologies. They argued that the bill, as currently written, would make it even harder for prosecutors to trace and punish unlawful activity tied to decentralized digital assets.
In their view, removing accountability from developers and network maintainers could turn decentralized platforms into attractive safe havens for illicit actors, including transnational criminal organizations and cartels. The senators stressed that regulatory clarity should not come at the cost of weakening public safety or financial crime enforcement.
The Role of the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act
The controversy largely stems from the inclusion of provisions inspired by the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act, or BRCA. This proposal seeks to clarify that individuals who develop blockchain software or maintain decentralized networks are not automatically classified as money transmitters under federal or state law.
Supporters argue that such protections are necessary to foster innovation and prevent developers from being punished for how others use open-source technology. Critics, however, warn that overly broad exemptions could shield individuals who play a more active role in facilitating illicit transactions.
Grassley and Durbin contend that the bill fails to clearly distinguish between neutral software development and conduct that effectively enables unlicensed money transmission.
Judiciary Committee Says It Was Left Out of the Process
Adding to the tension, the Senate Judiciary Committee leaders said they were not consulted during the drafting of the bill, despite their committee’s authority over federal criminal statutes and the Department of Justice.
They expressed frustration that proposed changes affecting criminal enforcement were advanced without giving the Judiciary Committee a meaningful opportunity to review or weigh in. In their letter, they urged the Banking Committee to reject any language that could weaken the government’s ability to hold culpable actors accountable.
This procedural dispute has further complicated efforts to move the legislation forward.
Legislative Delays and Political Uncertainty
The crypto market structure bill has already faced setbacks, with both the Senate Banking and Agriculture Committees postponing scheduled markups in an effort to build broader bipartisan support. The latest objections from the Judiciary Committee add another obstacle to an already fragile legislative path.
If the bill eventually reaches the Senate floor, it will require at least 60 votes to pass. That threshold would likely demand unanimous Republican support and backing from several Democrats, making any internal disagreement particularly consequential.
Crypto Industry Support Begins to Fracture
Industry reaction has also been mixed. Coinbase, one of the most influential lobbying forces in the crypto sector, withdrew its support for the bill earlier this week, citing concerns over multiple provisions. While the company has since indicated that negotiations with lawmakers are ongoing, the move underscored growing unease within the industry.
The combination of political resistance and shifting industry alliances raises questions about whether the bill can survive in its current form.
What This Means for the Future of US Crypto Regulation
The clash over developer protections reflects a broader struggle to balance innovation with enforcement in the rapidly evolving crypto space. Lawmakers face mounting pressure to define clear rules without creating blind spots that criminals can exploit.
As negotiations continue behind closed doors, the fate of the crypto market structure bill remains uncertain. What is clear, however, is that the debate has entered a critical phase—one that could shape how decentralized technologies are regulated in the United States for years to come.
Whether you’re a beginner or a seasoned investor, BYDFi gives you the tools to trade with confidence — low fees, fast execution, copy trading for newcomers, and access to hundreds of digital assets in a secure, user-friendly environment
2026-01-23 · 12 days ago0 044Perps vs Spot: Which Crypto Trading Strategy Is Best?
Key Takeaways:
- Spot trading involves actual ownership of the asset, making it ideal for long-term holding without liquidation risk.
- Perpetual Futures (Perps) allow for high leverage and shorting, but they introduce complex risks like funding rates and margin calls.
- Effective risk management, including the use of Stop-Losses and Isolated Margin, is non-negotiable when trading derivatives.
In the high-speed world of cryptocurrency, how you buy is just as important as what you buy. The Perps vs Spot decision is the first filter every trader must apply to their strategy.
Spot trading is the traditional way of investing. You pay cash, you get the asset. Perpetual Futures, or "Perps," are the financial rocket fuel that powers the massive volume numbers you see on exchanges. They offer superpowers like leverage, but they also expose you to risks that simply do not exist in the spot market. Understanding the mechanics of both is non-negotiable for survival in the 2026 market.
What Is Spot Trading?
Spot trading is the simplest form of commerce. It is "on the spot" settlement. When you buy Bitcoin on the Spot market, you take actual delivery of the digital coins.
You own them. You can withdraw them to a hardware wallet, send them to a friend, or use them to buy coffee. In the Perps vs Spot comparison, Spot is the clear winner for safety and simplicity.
The biggest advantage is the lack of liquidation risk. Even if Bitcoin drops 99%, you still own the Bitcoin. You are never forced to sell. You can simply wait for the market to recover, making it the only logical choice for long-term investors or "HODLers" who want to sleep soundly at night.
What Are Perpetual Futures?
Perpetual Futures are a unique crypto invention. They are contracts that track the price of the asset, but they never expire (unlike traditional futures). When you trade Perps, you never touch the actual Bitcoin.
You are betting on the price movement. Because you don't need to take delivery, exchanges allow you to use "Leverage." This separates it from Spot trading, where you typically need 100% of the cash upfront to buy the asset.
What Are the Benefits of Using Leverage?
The primary allure of the Perps vs Spot debate is capital efficiency. Leverage allows you to do more with less.
Imagine you have $1,000 to trade.
- On Spot: If Bitcoin goes up 10%, you make $100.
- On Perps (10x Leverage): You control a $10,000 position. If Bitcoin goes up 10%, you make $1,000. You have doubled your account in a single trade.
Leverage also allows for "Shorting." In Spot, you can only make money if the price goes up. With Perps, you can sell contracts you don't own, allowing you to profit when the market crashes. This makes Perps essential for hedging a portfolio during a bear market.
What Is a Margin Call?
With great power comes great responsibility, and in crypto, that responsibility is maintaining your margin. A Margin Call is the warning shot before the disaster.
When you trade with leverage, you must keep a certain amount of collateral (Margin) in your account to keep the trade open. If the price moves against you, your margin balance shrinks.
A Margin Call occurs when your equity falls below the "maintenance margin" requirement. The exchange is effectively telling you: "Add more money immediately, or we will close your trade." In the fast-moving crypto market, margin calls often happen seconds before a total liquidation, giving traders very little time to react.
What Is Liquidation Risk?
This is the danger zone that Spot traders never have to worry about. In Spot trading, your account balance only goes to zero if the asset goes to zero (which is rare for major coins).
In Perp trading, your account can go to zero even if the asset only drops 5% or 10%. If the price moves against your leveraged bet and you fail to meet the margin call, the exchange forcefully closes your position.
This is called Liquidation. You lose your entire collateral instantly. The exchange takes your money to ensure the winner on the other side of the trade gets paid. This binary outcome—win big or lose everything—is the defining risk of the Perps vs Spot dynamic.
How Do I Manage Risks in Crypto Trading?
Because Perps are dangerous, risk management is not optional; it is survival.
1. Use Stop-Losses: Never open a leveraged trade without a hard Stop-Loss order. This automatically sells your position if the price drops to a specific level, capping your loss at 1% or 2% of your portfolio rather than 100%.
2. Isolated vs. Cross Margin: Always use "Isolated Margin" when starting out.
- Cross Margin: Uses your entire wallet balance as collateral. A bad trade can wipe out your whole account.
- Isolated Margin: Only risks the specific amount you allocated to that single trade.
3. Position Sizing: Just because you can use 100x leverage doesn't mean you should. Professional traders rarely use more than 3x or 5x leverage. High leverage is gambling, not trading.
What Are the Hidden Costs of Perps?
The most critical difference in the Perps vs Spot debate is the "Funding Rate." Since Perps never expire, a mechanism is needed to keep the contract price close to the real Spot price.
This mechanism is a fee exchanged between traders every 8 hours. If the market is bullish, Longs pay Shorts. If you hold a Perp position for weeks, these fees can bleed your account dry. Spot positions have no ongoing fees; you can hold them for ten years for free.
How Do I Start Trading Perps?
If you have weighed the risks and are ready to trade, the process is straightforward but requires specific steps.
Step 1: Choose a Derivatives Exchange
You need a platform that supports futures, like BYDFi. Not all exchanges offer this feature due to regulations.Step 2: Transfer Funds
Most exchanges have separate wallets for "Spot" and "Futures/Derivatives." You must transfer your USDT or BTC from your Spot wallet to your Futures wallet.Step 3: Select Your Pair and Leverage
Choose the asset (e.g., BTC/USDT). Then, select your leverage slider. Start low (e.g., 2x or 3x) to get comfortable with the volatility.Step 4: Place Your Order
Decide if you are going Long (betting up) or Short (betting down). Enter your amount, set your Stop-Loss immediately, and confirm the order.Conclusion
Ultimately, the Perps vs Spot debate isn't about one being "better" than the other. It is about matching the tool to the job. Spot is for owning and sleeping well. Perps are for trading and active income.
Most professional traders use both. They keep their long-term savings in Spot cold storage and use a small portion of funds to hedge or speculate on Perps. Register at BYDFi today to access a platform that integrates both Spot and Derivatives markets in one seamless interface, giving you the power to choose the right strategy for every market condition.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Q: Can I go short on Spot?
A: No. Spot trading only allows you to buy and sell what you own. To "Short" (profit from price drops), you must use Perps or Margin trading.Q: Do I need a wallet for Perps?
A: No. Perps are traded entirely within the exchange's internal ledger. You do not need a MetaMask or Ledger wallet to trade futures.Q: Are taxes different for Perps vs Spot?
A: In many jurisdictions, yes. Spot trading is often treated as property (Capital Gains), while frequent Perp trading might be classified as business income or gambling winnings depending on your country. Always consult a tax professional.2026-02-02 · 2 days ago0 043Bitcoin vs Ethereum: Which Crypto Will Rule the Future?
Key Takeaways:
- Bitcoin dominates as a store of value ("Digital Gold"), currently commanding a market cap roughly 4x larger than Ethereum.
- Ethereum leads in utility ("Digital Oil"), serving as the infrastructure layer for DeFi, NFTs, and corporate blockchain adoption.
- A balanced portfolio often includes both, but the allocation depends on whether you prefer stability or technological growth potential.
The Bitcoin vs Ethereum debate is the Coke vs. Pepsi rivalry of the digital age. As we navigate the mature market of 2026, these two giants control the vast majority of the total crypto market capitalization.
For new investors, the choice can be paralyzing. Should you bet on the pioneer, the immutable money that started it all? Or should you bet on the innovator, the programmable platform that powers the decentralized internet?
To make the right decision, you must understand that they are not trying to be the same thing. They are competing in different sports entirely.
What Is the Current Market Cap Difference?
To understand the scale of these assets, we have to look at the numbers. As of early 2026, Bitcoin maintains a dominant lead with a market capitalization approaching $2 trillion. It typically commands over 50% of the entire industry's value (Bitcoin Dominance).
Ethereum trails significantly, with a valuation fluctuating around the $500 billion mark. In the Bitcoin vs Ethereum valuation battle, Bitcoin is roughly four times larger. This gap highlights that while Ethereum is the king of software, Bitcoin is the undisputed king of money.
What Is the Fundamental Difference?
The easiest way to understand the dynamic is through the lens of commodities. Bitcoin is Digital Gold. Its primary function is to preserve wealth.
It is simple, slow, and incredibly secure. It doesn't change much, and that is its superpower. Institutions buy it because it is a hedge against central bank money printing.
Ethereum, on the other hand, is digital oil. It is a utility token used to pay for gas fees on the network. If you want to use a decentralized app, trade an NFT, or take out a DeFi loan, you need ETH. It is a bet on the growth of the Web3 economy, not just a bet on money.
Which Asset Has Better Tokenomics?
When looking at supply, the two diverge sharply. Bitcoin has a hard cap. There will never be more than 21 million coins. This predictable scarcity is why it is the ultimate inflation hedge.
Ethereum does not have a hard cap, but it has a "burn mechanism." Through EIP-1559, a portion of every transaction fee is destroyed.
In periods of high network activity, Ethereum becomes deflationary, meaning the supply actually shrinks. In the Bitcoin vs Ethereum supply debate, Bitcoin offers certainty, while Ethereum offers a dynamic supply that reacts to demand.
Is the "Flippening" Possible?
The "Flippening" is the hypothetical moment when Ethereum's market cap surpasses Bitcoin's. For years, ETH fans have predicted this is imminent.
However, Bitcoin's dominance has remained stubborn. In times of economic fear, capital flees back to the safety of Bitcoin. For Ethereum to flip Bitcoin, the entire global economy would need to shift focus from "saving money" to "using blockchain applications" on a massive scale.
Conclusion
Ultimately, the Bitcoin vs Ethereum question doesn't have a single winner. Bitcoin wins at being money. Ethereum wins at being technology.
Most successful portfolios hold both. By allocating to Bitcoin for safety and Ethereum for growth, you capture the entire upside of the crypto revolution. Register at BYDFi today to build a balanced portfolio and trade both assets with deep liquidity.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Q: Is Ethereum riskier than Bitcoin?
A: Generally, yes. Because Ethereum changes its code more frequently to upgrade the network, it carries higher technical risk than the ossified Bitcoin protocol.Q: Can I stake Bitcoin?
A: Not natively. Bitcoin uses Proof-of-Work. You can only stake Ethereum (Proof-of-Stake) to earn yield on the protocol level.Q: Do they move together?
A: Yes. In the Bitcoin vs Ethereum correlation, they typically move in the same direction. However, Ethereum tends to have higher volatility, moving up more in bull markets and down more in bear markets.2026-02-02 · 2 days ago0 043
Popular Questions
How to Use Bappam TV to Watch Telugu, Tamil, and Hindi Movies?
How to Withdraw Money from Binance to a Bank Account in the UAE?
ISO 20022 Coins: What They Are, Which Cryptos Qualify, and Why It Matters for Global Finance
Bitcoin Dominance Chart: Your Guide to Crypto Market Trends in 2025
The Best DeFi Yield Farming Aggregators: A Trader's Guide