AI is moving beyond the browser and into the real world. The bottleneck? Data. Today we’re announcing a $15M seed round led by @a16zcrypto to build infra that collects, curates, and licenses high-quality data for physical AI. Incubated by and built on @StoryProtocol.

(@bonk_fun by @bonk_inu) doesn’t need to “win” to be meaningful. Its presence alone as a peer to @pumpdotfun in the memecoin launchpad space is already hugely valuable—and that’s why I fully support it. I don’t care which project the Solana OGs are backing, nor do I want to know. That’s not my concern. What matters is that @bonk_fun 's emergence breaks the monopoly narrative. Without it, we’d all be blindly accepting @pumpdotfun's $4B FDV as gospel, with no real comp in sight. Many, including myself, might’ve believed that valuation was justified—because there was nothing else to challenge it. But @bonk_fun changed that. While $BONK currently sits at a $2B FDV—half of $PUMP's FDV—@bonk_fun is already surpassing @pumpdotfun in launchpad market share. That forces a new set of questions for the market: Is @pumpdotfun overvalued? Was @HyperliquidX ever a valid comp? If @bonk_fun is already leading but valued lower, something doesn’t add up. Yes, @bonk_fun has only been #1 for a few days(two days I believe), and yes, FDV comparisons this early may be premature. But the very fact that we can start comparing is the real value. If @bonk_fun keeps this up, either 1) $BONK’s FDV will rise, or 2) $PUMP’s will drop. Either way, the pricing power shifts. What makes $BONK especially interesting is its clear buyback model—giving users a framework for valuation. $PUMP still lacks that transparency. In the end, price is information. @bonk_fun didn’t just launch a product—it injected a market signal into a space that was dangerously close to echoing a single voice. Now, we decide.

It feels like the @ikadotxyz team is making a serious mistake with the current token claim process. Right now, Korean users are unable to claim their tokens because they can’t complete KYC. KYC for token claims? Sure, that’s understandable—but if that was going to be a requirement, it should’ve been clearly communicated from the very beginning. I, for one, don’t recall ever seeing any such notice. Look, it’s fine to run bold or experimental strategies—but excluding Korean users who have participated fairly in the ecosystem? That’s not the way to build goodwill in this market. I’m also concerned that this kind of approach from IKA could end up reflecting negatively on the broader @SuiNetwork ecosystem. Of course, I know they’re different team—but public perception doesn’t always make that distinction. I’ve seen a lot of airdrop strategies over the years, but this one is uniquely weird. If this doesn’t get fixed, IKA really shouldn’t expect to host any successful meetups or activations in Korea period.

Wow @asclubnft @Alucard_eth Blocked ASC holder (I have 2 ASC) This is what we called ‘Real community’ RIP @EclipseFND @akachacolate @0xtaetaehoho

Coincidentally, since @akachacolate is in Korea right now, he reached out after reading this post and suggested we meet up to talk. So we did. It turns out there were a few misunderstandings. First, Nate seemed to believe that hosting an event was important in order to generate attention in the Korean market. Up until now, @EclipseFND hadn’t really been on the radar in Korea, so the idea was to attract attention by hosting something locally. In addition, the dinner event was meant to differentiate Eclipse from other protocols and explain how it’s doing things differently — and ideally, to convert Korean attendees into onchain users. But from what I heard, that message didn’t land as well as they had hoped. To be honest, even though I saw multiple KOLs posting about the event, the spotlight was completely on the food, and not on what Eclipse was actually trying to say or do. Even if some KOLs tried to communicate the message, it likely got drowned out by all the hype around the fancy meal. The signal was lost in the noise — the medium overshadowed the message. Also, to be fair, many scammy projects in the past have used “good food” and fancy dinners to promote themselves in Korea, so when Eclipse came in and hosted a similar style of event, it naturally made me skeptical as well. That said, I do think it would be unfair to single them out. Other protocols have spent anywhere from $500K to $1 million on extravagant events in Korea too — so criticizing Eclipse for hosting a dinner feels a bit hypocritical in that broader context. However, I still believe their airdrop strategy is a valid point of criticism. Realistically, those who bridged $ETH into Eclipse and tried DeFi apps are much more likely to become long-term users. But the airdrop seemed to disproportionately reward people who simply clicked the Turbo tab — which raises questions about how well the airdrop was actually designed. Of course, no project gets everything right from the beginning. But perhaps it would’ve been better to clearly define the airdrop criteria up front. Imagine someone who bridged ETH, used DeFi protocols, and still got nothing — while someone else who just showed up for a fancy dinner got rewarded. It’s not hard to see why that would feel unfair. Ultimately, I hope projects approach the Korean market with a bit more thoughtfulness. As important as this market is, the way teams are showing up here is starting to become a bit extreme. Less food, more product. Less flash, more authenticity. Those are the kinds of projects I want to see getting more attention. In that regard, I think @AbstractChain set a great example — rather than hosting a flashy event, they focused on onboarding real partners like @officialmodhaus & @triplescosmos, and that made all the difference.

FYI: WE WILL NEVER WORK WITH TEAM LIKE THIS.

Me seeing projects throwing fancy meetups in APAC while not taking care of their ecosystem builders / contributors