Dialogue with Pima: From Meme Coins to Launchpad Platforms, the Investment Logic Behind All-in Culture
TechFlow Selected TechFlow Selected
Dialogue with Pima: From Meme Coins to Launchpad Platforms, the Investment Logic Behind All-in Culture
A good launchpad can lock in your funds, generate profits, and truly let you win effortlessly.
Navigating Web3 tides with focused insightsCompiled & Translated: TechFlow
Broadcast Date: May 24, 2025
Podcast Source: Web3 101
[Hosts]
Liu Feng, Partner at BODL Ventures, former Editor-in-Chief of ChainNews
Xiong Haojun Jack, Deputy Editor at BlockBeats, host of "Web3 Wuming Shuo"
[Guest]
Pi Ma, Co-founder of Continue Capital
Pi Ma, legendary crypto investor, joins Web3 101 to discuss why he believes Memes never die, the investment logic behind Meme launch platforms, and how the investment themes in the crypto world have transformed in this new era.
Cosmos Meme Reflection: The Siphoning Effect and Matthew Effect of Liquidity
Liu Feng: As an OG, you've achieved remarkable success in public chains and DeFi. But today in the crypto investment world, being called an OG feels like an insult. Now it's all about P Xiaojiang becoming P Marshal—what do you think about this trend?
Pi Ma:
I'm a relatively seasoned participant in Memecoins. On one hand, I've been heavily involved in Solana during this cycle—I've participated in all major Solana Memecoins, from early ones like BONK, WIF, BOME, POP CAT, to later ones like GOAT, as well as numerous projects that were eventually淘汰ed.
At the time, we assumed that if Memecoins revived on Solana, other public chains would also see some recovery. So after establishing positions in BONK on Solana, we went to ecosystems like Cosmos and Avalanche looking for similar opportunities—a logic that seemed perfectly sound back then.
But I overlooked the siphoning effect and Matthew effect of liquidity. Once you miss the first wave, it's essentially over. You might expect second or third waves, but in reality, its historical mission was already fulfilled during the initial rebound phase. All subsequent mainstream capital attention returned to chains led by Solana.
I previously shared that Memecoins typically account for 1% to 3% of a public chain’s market cap, possibly up to 5% under extreme conditions. After extensive observation and statistics, I concluded that top-tier Memecoins generally occupy 1%–5% of a chain’s market cap over certain periods. There are outliers like DOGE and SHIB, which I excluded from analysis.
As the crypto space evolved, Solana completely diverged from this framework—constantly spawning endless waves of Memecoins, creating an atmosphere entirely different from other ecosystems.
This is entirely driven by Solana’s retail investors. Solana is fundamentally a retail-centric market, which determines that its ecosystem spawns many emotionally charged, highly volatile, and aggressively commercialized sectors. While observing Solana's overall ecosystem, I’m also willing to actively participate in Memecoins due to their high liquidity, engagement, broad user base, and relative non-mainstream status.
How to Profit from the Behavioral Finance Feast of Memecoins?
Liu Feng: If someone wants to invest in Memecoins, how can they actually make money? This is a very blunt question.
Pi Ma:
About 90%, even more, of my Memecoin exposure is on Solana. I don’t pay attention to coins on any other chain. The market has already evolved into an optimal solution—you're merely searching for secondary alternatives within it.
The core reason for seeking second-tier options is you failed to achieve results or didn't participate in the primary opportunity—you're just chasing catch-up rallies, which easily leads people into investment traps. You’ll find that once you enter, either nothing happens, or you’re tortured by volatility until completely worn out. Another critical issue is difficulty realizing profits. When Solana’s top Memes pull back 30%, your 200% gain vanishes almost instantly—the drawdown is extremely fast. Therefore, in any investment system, I rarely aim to fully lock in gains. Personally, trying to dodge the first major downturn from bull to bear markets is incredibly difficult. Crypto runs 24/7—you can't monitor every price fluctuation in real-time, making it inevitable that unrealized profits are hard to secure.
Market leaders offer you a second chance to peak out and attempt profit-taking. That’s why focusing solely on leaders is sufficient.
Secondly, when investing in Memecoins, many emphasize speed and quick wins. But based on my personal experience achieving significant returns, fast-and-short strategies aren't suitable for mid-to-large-sized investors unless your capital size is very small.
Fast-and-short participants are often drawn by short-term attention without considering the core operational logic of Memecoins. Breaking down Memecoins along X and Y axes—with time on the X-axis and market cap on the Y-axis—you'll find that most Memecoin market caps are positively correlated with time. Time is a crucial factor. Except for rare cases like BOME and TRUMP, all current billion-dollar-plus Memecoins have operated for at least six months. Without sufficient time, many assumptions simply don’t hold.
I believe Memecoins are often a grand feast of behavioral finance.
Richard Thaler, a pioneer of behavioral finance and Nobel laureate, divides traditional investment systems into two accounts: savings and entertainment. Memecoins strongly align with the “entertainment account.” Daniel Kahneman also proposed a famous dual-system theory: System 1 is slow, logical, rational, and energy-consuming; System 2 is simple, direct, fast, and low-effort. In crypto, Memecoins perfectly match System 2—fast, effective, highly volatile—fulfilling our emotional FOMO and speculative capital movements.
A recent paper suggested investment decisions take no more than 6 minutes. Today in Memecoins, it’s down to 6 seconds. Many of my own investment decisions are impulsive—but only because I’ve already solidified my foundational beta, or savings account. Only then do I have the bandwidth to explore alpha opportunities.
A key challenge behavioral finance poses to classical finance is that everyone is irrational. Your perceived rationality may just exist within your own information bubble. People live amidst massive noise, and most lack the ability to distinguish signal from noise.
Overall, I see Memecoins as a major evolution of behavioral finance. If future theoretical developments emerge in behavioral finance, Memecoin data could serve as excellent research samples.
The Three Core Questions: Do You Dare Buy? Do You Dare Go All-In? Can You HODL During Downturns?
Liu Feng: Across past cycles, we learned your tightly reasoned investment logic. Today, however, we seem to focus only on volatility and whether a Meme’s social consensus can quickly attract liquidity. Do you think this trend is sustainable?
Pi Ma:
Many investments are difficult precisely because times are changing—investor demographics, age groups, and income levels are shifting.
Let me state my conclusion upfront: Memecoins will continue evolving, not just in crypto. In my view, the crypto domain isn't isolated—it's deeply connected and synchronized with global developments. People who missed out on economic booms, the unemployed, those left behind by globalization, individuals trapped in rigid class structures with no direction or investment opportunities—they develop a rebellious mindset, rejecting elite figures through their choices. Whether it's U.S. tariffs, the rise of European nationalism, or conservative resurgence in Australia, there's a global wave of neo-nationalism. This trend manifests in real life as slogans like "All in" or "going all-in"—a phenomenon not limited to crypto but present globally.
I believe the rise of nationalism injects tremendous energy into Memecoin and other niche, speculative markets. This force, amplified by AI and peer-to-peer internet technologies, will significantly disrupt traditional financial markets.
You pay attention to P Xiaojiang because he brings massive capital movement and visible outcomes—the most impactful, shareable, eye-catching narrative. I avoid sharing actual trade screenshots, but many Twitter users leverage them for massive exposure. Meanwhile, we now emphasize information egalitarianism. Human attention is limited. When you spend it all on P Xiaojiang, you won’t deeply study theoretical frameworks. Ultimately, it comes back to the classic trio: Do you dare buy? If you buy, do you dare go all-in? If it drops, can you hold?
Oftentimes, you only see the outcome—not the underlying decision-making process. Even knowing the result, you still won’t buy, won’t go all-in, and won’t hold through volatility.
With the arrival of a lonely society, selling needs is more compelling than selling products in niche sectors. What is demand in crypto? Psychological belonging. Memecoin holders form tight-knit communities with strong psychological identification, which reinforces itself over time. Unfortunately, Pump has launched over a million Memecoins, yet only a handful survive. This state of excessive participation without meaningful outcomes creates a vicious cycle: Seeing others succeed intensely frustrates you, driving you to work harder—but on wrong choices—further damaging your mindset, preventing focused analysis, leading to worse performance. It’s a deeply negative feedback loop.
Memecoins are a fascinating social phenomenon—yet fewer and fewer people truly observe them.
Focusing on Meme Infrastructure: Which LaunchPads Are Worth Studying?
Jack:
Even if a Meme 100x’s, it may not yield substantial results. So what’s your purpose in frequently participating in small-to-medium Memes?
Pi Ma:
It's about gauging market temperature. I need to engage in the most liquid, retail-heavy markets. Discussing Memecoins isn’t about expecting direct returns. For us investors, we’re more interested in Meme infrastructure—DEXs, LaunchPads, etc. These are entirely different systems—you could say left hand Beta, right hand Alpha. Only after my Beta foundation is solid do I allocate time and energy to Meme market investments to sense market momentum.
One of crypto’s greatest strengths is using subtle observations to track global capital flows. Even if all Memecoins go to zero, it’s not a major loss. But Memecoin cycles do correlate with broader markets—though most people remain unaware. We must consider global capital allocation. These assets merely serve my core Beta thesis. Participation in Memecoins helps validate logic and refine assessment of core Beta holdings.
Liu Feng: I understand your logic. Previously, you explained why you only seek real gains from large-cap Memes—this relates to your scale, differing sharply from retail narratives of changing one’s fate via Meme investing. Retailers may chase Alpha, but for you, Beta matters more.
This is indeed the era of Memecoins—Memes are the voice of the times. We shouldn’t deny it; we should embrace it.
Given that, let’s examine Beta—specifically, Meme launch platforms that have undergone multiple generations of evolution. Could you introduce which platforms stand out to you as worth studying?
Pi Ma:
The most prominent is still Pump.fun (hereafter Pump). They haven’t innovated much, but crypto’s core business model is transaction fees. Your market share in this model determines your cash flow—and thus your valuation. Pump meets the demand for asset issuance. When a product aligns perfectly with massive demand, supply and demand converge instantly. Infinite supply meets infinite desire among retail investors for astronomical returns. Hence, asset issuance platforms sprout like mushrooms after rain.
Consumers in crypto are highly financialized individuals with acute risk awareness and strong gambling impulses. Products must be designed around these impulses. Where do retail users spend money? Only on trading fees. They willingly pay higher fees attempting to hit a Memecoin. They’re not foolish—why else would they pay such high MEV priority fees? Because they believe returns justify costs.
We define crypto retail users as a hyper-financialized group. Every product we build must revolve around their needs—that’s one key reason Pump.fun succeeded. Later AI-focused Virtuals is also a LaunchPad. Both satisfy intense demand for asset issuance. Thus, observing launch platforms makes for excellent investment targets. A thousand or ten thousand Memecoins may die, but new ones will always rise. However, a strong launch platform allows your capital to stay put, generate profits, and truly “sit and earn,” capturing maximum value from the entire Memecoin trend.
Launch Platforms vs Public Chains: Attracting Developers Is Key
Jack: For example, now that Virtuals has arrived on Solana, do you think it’s too late? Is opportunity a one-time thing?
Pi Ma:
For any launch platform, you must understand its supply and demand dynamics. Who serves as the supplier for the platform? That’s a critical factor. Pump’s suppliers are largely anonymous; Virtuals applies some curation but remains mostly anonymous. Therefore, when evaluating any launch platform, closely monitor revenue.
My evaluation framework for launch platforms is identical to that for DEXs. To some extent, launch platforms resemble public chains—though people rarely place them on equal footing.
The core capability of a launch platform lies in attracting developers—exactly like public chains. Why would a developer choose A over B? This deserves deep reflection. It’s the most important determinant of a launch platform’s or public chain’s future trajectory.
Because the end-user experience is dominated by retail users, we often assume launch platforms and public chains are consumer-facing (to C). But in my view, they are business-facing (to B). Without quality assets and strong developers, neither a public chain nor a launch platform can succeed.
For both public chains and launch platforms, future cash flow depends on sustained trading volume, which in turn relies on diverse offerings. Thus, attracting top developers to your platform is paramount. Winning over retail users is easy—just provide good assets, and they’ll flock in.
Naturally, marketing tactics matter for both public chains and launch platforms. But without injecting high-quality assets, longevity is unattainable.
Believe’s Unique Market Positioning
Pi Ma:
I believe Believe entered the market with the right strategy. App developers face significant funding needs, yet rarely receive financing. Believe’s supply side consists of independent developers who annually build numerous apps, hoping to achieve positive cash flow but lacking proper monetization channels. If the market is too niche, reaching billion- or hundred-billion-dollar valuations is impossible.
Believe focuses on these independent developers—those exploring new fields and directions. Crypto retail investors have high risk tolerance and appetite. Crucially, market caps are very low, enabling hundred- or thousand-fold potential. Believe directly adopted best practices from other launch platforms—sharing fees with developers. This works exceptionally well, delivering immediate positive cash flow during cold starts.
In traditional tech, building an app requires teams handling development, marketing, and more. In crypto, you only need to build a product. Success isn’t guaranteed, but once launched, you could earn hundreds of thousands in cash within a week—massive income for solo developers. With this positive cash flow, they can further refine products, expand markets, and serve users.
This explains why this model is called an internet capital market—it addresses the acute funding challenges faced by small developers and micro-enterprises, unlocks supply-side potential, and aligns perfectly with trends. With AI, a single independent developer can now achieve impressive annual revenues, while promotion and operations can go viral via TikTok or Twitter.
But could Believe spawn truly large, exceptional companies? I’m skeptical. I remain cautiously observant. Yet I firmly believe Believe effectively solves a niche market problem—serving narrow, specific audiences with targeted needs. They earn from this segment. They don’t need to scale massively—they have their market.
Another aspect that impressed me about Believe is their careful planning and packaging. Their UI design is thoughtful. They spotlight select projects and events, crafting compelling narratives. Beyond crypto, they aim to connect with other niche communities unfamiliar with encryption. This process mirrors the first wave of AI—thousands of such projects will likely fail. It’s a process of familiarization and adaptation. Let’s keep watching.
Liu Feng: You clearly appreciate Believe’s logic and positioning—it’s more like a practical application launchpad. Currently, all launched assets are Meme-like. Perhaps Believe could spawn genuinely usable applications.
Pi Ma:
Hopefully, haha.
Update: Before this podcast aired, the Believe team announced they would suspend automatic coin launches on Launchcoin, switching to manual review with verified tags added. We asked Pi Ma for his thoughts. His response: "Approval-based systems are usually dumb; permissionless is the way." Clearly, he dislikes this change.
Liu Feng: Recently, we pulled up emerging apps or assets on Believe—there’s a list of about fifty or sixty. I wonder—if everything remains purely Meme-like, the concept becomes too abstract. But if real applications emerge, this could become something different. Take Dingaling’s launchpad, for instance—its advantage lies in unique token design. But token design alone seems insufficient to establish market position, especially since Virtuals’ tokenomics are already quite advanced.
Pi Ma:
The key is having people—how to attract developers to your launch platform. That’s absolutely critical.
Trading Volume: The Sole Metric for Evaluating Launch Platforms
Pi Ma:
The only metric for evaluating a LaunchPad is trading volume—it represents core revenue. If you don’t grasp this fundamental logic, you wouldn’t have invested in Pump when it emerged.
You now see the results—Pump has earned $700 million. What’s a fair valuation? Under normal logic, 20x PE gives $14 billion—reasonable. Given high volatility and the impermanence of Memecoins, 10x PE ($7 billion) works. Even 5x PE ($3.5 billion) is acceptable. The core question is:
What are you really investing in? It’s the discounted future cash flows.
So when assessing a LaunchPad, it doesn’t matter whether the platform is currently valued at $100M, $200M, or $1B. What matters is whether its revenue can sustainably grow. This logic maps directly onto stock market investing.
Crypto AI: Outcome-Oriented Investment Returns
Liu Feng: I must ask you to disclose—did you invest in Believe?
Pi Ma: Yes.
Liu Feng: This disclosure is important. Listeners should know Pi Ma invested in this project, so his high praise may reflect bias. As investors, everyone should conduct their own research and take responsibility.
Besides Memes, do you still follow AI Agents?
Pi Ma:
The entire AI sector now operates on an outcome-oriented basis—specifically, investment return orientation.
Regarding Crypto AI, infrastructure investments seem to merely replicate AI technologies from the internet space. We don’t see deep moats or unique advantages. Therefore, we remain strictly outcome-driven—can it help me trade better or increase revenue? The combination of AI and social media likely holds greater profit potential.
Liu Feng: So it sounds like you’re not very confident in Crypto AI or Crypto AI agents?
Pi Ma:
On one hand, their core technologies largely originate from traditional internet domains. On the other, they must find their own business models. Pump, as a representative of application-layer success, is highly significant. We tend to focus more on application-layer ecosystems.
For application ecosystems, I first need to identify who the paying users are. Beyond asset issuance and trading, most application projects fail to materialize because they can’t generate positive cash flow. Take games—can you name a blockchain game generating stable annual revenue of $300M or $500M? No.
Liu Feng: In real-world gaming, that’s certainly possible. But in crypto, revenue clearly relies solely on token sales.
Pi Ma:
Exactly. Due to the uniqueness of crypto users, asking players to pay feels absurd—"Did I hear that right?" No one pays. Yet payment is the core business model of games.
Therefore, in application areas, revenue remains paramount. Where does revenue come from? How high is its quality? Is it sustainable? These are key concerns—all outcome-oriented.
Liu Feng: So we can say your current investment logic is crystal clear: don’t pitch me trends or grand visions. I want proven results, self-sustaining operations, and real users.
Pi Ma:
Yes, because times evolve, innovation shifts, macro interest rate environments change, and globalization dynamics transform. I believe you can’t treat everything as static.
Optimistic About Crypto’s Future Development
Liu Feng: The crypto world you describe doesn’t seem like the one we know.
Pi Ma:
Actually, I’m very optimistic about crypto’s future development.
Many logics revolve around trading. Any product—be it a launch platform, DEX, traditional exchange, or sniper bot—that better satisfies global users’ trading experience will have market fit, demand, users, and customers willing to pay.
U.S. legislation is gradually legalizing and regulating crypto, bringing massive capital on-chain. Stablecoins are only $200 billion today. Over the next two to five years, they could reach $1 trillion. At that scale, 24/7 trading and operation will become standard. The trading sector opens vast, enormous market spaces. I’m highly excited about DeFi or on-chain internet financial products.
Additionally, crypto’s core business model is transaction fees. Once transaction fee rebates are realized, enterprises reinvest earnings to expand user bases. Combined with crypto communities’ religious fervor, significant growth is possible even in obscure niches we haven’t explored.
This represents a viable, effective operating model—you don’t need to sell tokens to maintain cash flow. Just encourage more trading. Achieve $100M daily trading volume, earn $1M in revenue, use it to broaden reach and boost profits.
Of course, problems exist—once arbitrage ends or the product lacks positive information beyond trading, collapse may follow. But that’s secondary. What matters is seeing a powerful startup mechanism: using transaction fees to support early-stage company growth—a model perfectly aligned with crypto investment characteristics.
Liu Feng: You’re still full of passion—thank you for this faith recharge.
Pi Ma:
I just see a possibility.
Public Chain Value Lies in Gas and MEV Fees
Jack: I have a concern. Earlier, we mentioned that with stablecoin growth, more funds will flow on-chain. But could it be that all this capital stays in stablecoin form—using stablecoins for pricing and settlement—without ever engaging the native assets of the chain, such as ETH or Solana? Profit-generating platforms may remain at the application layer like Pump, while the base layer continues relying on selling tokens—issuing to nodes, who then sell to the market—leaving the base-layer token without a self-sustaining fee mechanism. If so, despite industry growth, base-layer tokens may gain little benefit.
Pi Ma:
The core value of public chains lies in Gas fees and the evolving MEV.
Gas fees are payments required for every action—a cost for bandwidth, storage, or computing resources on a chain during a given period. It’s a mandatory expense, meaning it forms a robust business and investment model.
Massive stablecoins entering any chain will inevitably create liquidity and trading demands. Onboarding all real-world assets onto chains—tokenization—is a massive trend due to its transparency, flexibility, and 24/7 availability. To truly understand “on-chain Nasdaq,” think asset issuance and trading—that’s the source.
With massive capital inflows, look at Tron’s revenue—extremely stable. Tron maintains billion-dollar revenues thanks to stablecoin-related Gas fee demand.
Jack: I understand that. But observable trends—like Ethereum’s last cycle—showed Gas fees plus innovations like NFTs and DeFi greatly enhanced value capture. However, as applications scaled, high Gas fees became expansion bottlenecks, prompting efforts to reduce fees. As fees dropped, even though on-chain usage increased, total Gas revenue declined, making it unsustainable as a standalone value driver. We see similar patterns on Solana.
Pi Ma:
You’re absolutely right. All blockchain systems are software—they continuously iterate. Thinking long-term or ultimately, the marginal cost of Gas fees across all public chains approaches zero. So how do they profit?
Look at Solana’s priority fees. Base fees constitute only about 1/3; most are tips and priority fees. Why inflate tips and priority fees? Because this is where true competitiveness lies. Future public chain revenue will depend on tips and MEV. Solana uses this to differentiate its ecosystem—base fees for simple transfers, other fees for complex transactions.
You’ll find that optimizing systems around trading captures massive profits at the transaction layer. MEV and REV profits are enormous and will far exceed Gas fees in the future. Why do users pay for acceleration? To claim a block—trading is first-come-first-served. This is why on-chain Nasdaq pursues millisecond-level block speeds. Solana’s 400ms isn’t nearly enough. Maybe 20ms could compete with traditional internet.
In this REV or MEV competition, customer willingness to pay is the core competency. Why pay? Because they see profit potential. Whoever captures the bulk of MEV and incentivizes customer spending determines the discount model for future enterprise cash flows.
Solana’s daily revenue now sees 80% coming from tips, priority fees, and MEV—this speaks volumes. We must seek more durable, efficient, high-quality income streams.
A chain’s moat is its developers. Public chains are B2B markets—consumers don’t determine success. Each chain competes to attract developers. For me, a chain’s trading volume, REV, and developer activity are key indicators of growth potential and future adaptability.
We now rarely invest in new public chain projects—the landscape is largely set. What remains uncertain is your position sizing. Network effects matter—like why no one challenges CATL in new energy, because ecosystem building is extremely difficult.
Liu Feng: Can we conclude that, in your view, the public chain map is now fixed—no new chains will successfully rise?
Pi Ma:
Over the past decade in Chinese internet, only ByteDance emerged as a $100B+ giant. If VCs or public markets missed ByteDance, they’ve missed most of the opportunity—ByteDance captured 55% of profits. The 80/20 rule exists everywhere. Our hopes persist because we cling to past logics.
Crypto still holds promise—Hyperliquid is rising. I believe Hyperliquid and Solana share the same goal: becoming a decentralized Nasdaq. Monad might qualify too.
The core is learning to do the math. With abundant ETFs arriving, we face more mature investors. Friction in unified accounts keeps shrinking—you can buy Nvidia, Alibaba, Tencent today, Bitcoin ETF tomorrow in the same account. Your choices determine prices.
The key question: Why give Solana or Ethereum 100x or 200x PE? If multi-cycle revenue fails to meet expectations, PE must drop. Investment frameworks mature, yet many overlook this. Focus on core revenue and fundamentals.
There are many thoughtful people in the world—but attention is now extremely fragmented and superficial. Emotions are expressed through simplistic, abstract language—like “all-in”—a microcosm of societal evolution. Independent thinking and noise-filtering abilities remain scarce.
Layer 2 Has Greatly Undermined Ethereum’s Economic Value
Liu Feng: My last question was going to be: If choosing between Ethereum and Solana, which would you pick? But clearly, that’s unnecessary now.
So could you explain how Ethereum lost you—why? Are Ethereum’s developers inadequate?
Pi Ma:
I believe Ethereum’s pivotal shift occurred around 2018–2019. When you asked me then which area I was bearish on, I said Layer 2—because Layer 2 would drastically undermine Ethereum’s economic value.
I’ve studied technical terms like settlement layer and execution layer, but I’m unimpressed. These concepts need quantifiable metrics: How much does the settlement layer settle? How much does Layer 1 earn daily? Once Layer 2 splits off, OK—Base and Arbitrum take all the money. How much do they remit to the central government, Ethereum? Is this revenue-sharing model reasonable? After regional warlords (Layer 2s) gain substantial economic control, will they seek armed independence? Will they pursue more profitable, market-driven operations? These were issues Ethereum never properly addressed.
I believe everything can be quantified—explained through financial metrics. Public chains have extremely high gross margins. You must clarify who earns the money. If unclear, you won’t know who pays—that’s critically important.
Therefore, I personally view Ethereum’s Layer 2 path as fundamentally flawed—it poorly rewards Ethereum itself. Most money goes to Layer 2 regional warlords.
Conclusion
Liu Feng: Finally, I’d like to dedicate this episode to a dear friend whom both Pi Ma and I knew well—a devoted fan of Pi Ma who sadly passed away last year. We all feel profound regret.
If he were here, he would have listened to this podcast with great care. I dedicate this to him, and thank Pi Ma for sharing.
Join TechFlow official community to stay tuned
Telegram:https://t.me/TechFlowDaily
X (Twitter):https://x.com/TechFlowPost
X (Twitter) EN:https://x.com/BlockFlow_News
深潮TechFlow
