# DeFi — X 热门讨论 (2026-10-09 07:29 UTC)
## @_tanviir (Tanvir) · 10-09 03:10 · ♥70 ↻5 💬54 Good morning gZAPS
Onchain activity can be more than just transaction history.
The interesting part is how that activity can help measure behavior, build reputation and create better incentives.
That’s what makes @zerufinance worth watching.
With Zaps connecting participation to campaigns and zScore representing wallet behavior ZeruAI is exploring how onchain signals can become more useful across DeFi.
The bigger question is simple:
Can consistent, genuine activity matter more than short-term farming?
That’s a direction worth paying attention to.
Explore Zeru https://t.co/pZfps3u3kW https://x.com/_tanviir/status/2108394729440432579
## @Crypt0bells (Bells) · 10-09 05:39 · ♥79 ↻10 💬29 Your AI doesn’t just talk about crypto. It pays for it.
I’m now a @PayBox ambassador and I’ve been using it in real-time on Claude.
Swapped ETH to USDC on Base. Paid for an AI-generated banner for $0.005 via x402. Sent USDC to a friend. All in one chat. No card details. No exchange. My keys never left my hands.
PayBox is the non-custodial wallet for AI agents you connect once, set your limits, and your AI handles the rest.
Aave. Jupiter. Hyperliquid. Kamino. World. Sunrise. 6 DeFi plugins. All live.
While you’re busy, let your AI pay. 🔵
👉 https://t.co/SIWT8msf0m https://x.com/Crypt0bells/status/2108432152434036758
## @DeFi_Dad (DeFi Dad ⟠ defidad.eth) · 10-09 01:43 · ♥80 ↻4 💬13 It’s an open secret that they are just a pain in everyone’s ass, they never miss a chance to take cheap shots at Ethereum and meanwhile seem to blame Ethereum tech stack for their unique GTM/BD failure to build an L2 eco.
Being an L1 wouldn’t fix their problems because their problem is they have no incentive for builders or investors, they signal zero alignment with Ethereum to win hearts and minds, but sure, go promise everyone you’re the only safe chain during a doomsday panic selloff, maybe it’s the best strategic move to save your dying network.
They raised an insane amount of money off the hype of Ethereum L2s, enjoyed the most overinflated FDV due to their status as an Ethereum L2, and still the token investors said “no thanks.”
It’s been a year of liquid investors rediscovering great builders with great onchain products and buying their tokens.
The market isn’t the problem. Starknet and STRK are not attractive to invest in.
I’m so done with the subtle pot shots like their failings are due to something broken with Ethereum.
I am here to tell them: STFU and LEAVE
I haven’t given a thought about Starknet since the pathetic airdrop that pissed everyone off, one of a million things they did that pissed off investors.
STRK is just tokenized nerd flexing.
You couldn’t pay me to long STRK.
Good riddens. https://x.com/DeFi_Dad/status/2108372795553919025
## @Cryptoskyrun (Sky_Run ♟️) · 10-09 04:33 · ♥78 ↻2 💬12 Something interesting is happening across DeFi that I think the market is still underpricing.
More protocols are starting to turn protocol revenue into direct token value capture and that changes how I look at DeFi tokens.
For a long time, the main metrics were: ❖ TVL ❖ DEX volume ❖ Fees ❖ Users ❖ Revenue
But there’s another question that matters just as much: Where does the money go after the protocol makes it?
A protocol can generate hundreds of millions in trading volume and millions in fees, but that doesn’t automatically mean the token benefits.
The more interesting setup is: Users → Volume → Fees → Revenue → Buybacks / Burns → Token
That creates an actual value capture loop.
@HyperliquidX is one of the clearest examples.
Its protocol has generated roughly $72M+ in holder revenue over the last 30 days, with the vast majority of trading fees flowing toward $HYPE buybacks through the Assistance Fund.
And it’s not an isolated idea anymore.
Across DeFi, we’re seeing more protocols experiment with some combination of:
→ token buybacks → burns → fee distributions → revenue backed incentives → treasury accumulation → direct value accrual to token holders
This is important because protocol growth and token growth are two different things.
A protocol can be winning onchain while its token captures almost none of that growth.
That’s why I think the next DeFi valuation framework should look beyond TVL and fees.
I’d track: ➥ Holder Revenue / Market Cap How much revenue is the protocol generating relative to its valuation and how much of that value is actually reaching the token?
➥ Buyback Yield How much capital is being deployed to buy the token relative to its market cap?
➥ Supply Impact Are those buybacks actually reducing circulating supply, or is new issuance simply offsetting them?
This is where things get interesting.
Two protocols can have similar TVL, similar volume and similar revenue… but if one has a strong revenue → buyback → token loop while the other doesn’t, their tokens are fundamentally different assets.
DeFi is slowly moving from: “How much money does this protocol make?”
to:
“How much of that money does the token actually capture?”
IMO, that difference is going to matter a lot more in the next phase of DeFi. https://x.com/Cryptoskyrun/status/2108415522563842345
## @TozartWeb3 (Tozart) · 10-09 05:35 · ♥79 ↻2 💬1 The Data Layer
AI is only as useful as the information it can access.
@get_truenorth’s documentation describes access to 40+ real-time sources across areas such as:
• Crypto markets • On-chain data • DeFi • Perpetuals • Options • Prediction markets • Exchanges
The important part isn’t having more data.
It’s being able to connect the relevant pieces when answering a question. > 引用 @TozartWeb3: From Chatbot to Trading Desk
A chatbot answers questions. A trading desk helps you work.
That distinction matters.
@get_truenorth is moving beyond the idea of:
“Ask AI about Bitcoin.”
The goal is closer to:
Research the market. Compare assets. Challenge the thesis. Build a setup. Watch the position. Review the trade.
That changes AI from something you ask into something you can work with. https://x.com/TozartWeb3/status/2108431088611635567