Author: OxTochi Compiled by Chopper, Foresight News I still remember my first cryptocurrency airdrop like it was yesterday. It was 2020, and I was still busy completing bounties on Bitcointalk. One morning, I was woken by the ping of a WhatsApp message from a friend. "Have you used Uniswap?" he asked. I replied "Yes," and he said, "Then you should have 400 UNI tokens to claim, which is now worth over $1,000." I immediately went to Uniswap's Twitter page to find the claim link and sold them immediately after claiming them. It's that simple, free money falling from the sky. No forms to fill out, no levels to grind in Discord, no "you need to contribute to get it" rules or anything like that. Looking back now, that moment defined what airdrops should be: a surprise “subsidy” for users of your favorite product who are using it, instead of the worthless garbage activities that they are today. The Golden Age of Airdrops Later, I received a 1-inch airdrop. At that time, any wallet eligible for UNI could receive 1 inch. But it was the dYdX airdrop that truly changed my understanding of airdrops. To participate, I had to cross-chain my ETH to the dYdX protocol. At the time, most Layer 2 projects were still in the whitepaper stage, and cross-chain fees were incredibly high. I made a few trades to generate some volume, but it wasn't a lot, and then I withdrew my assets. With just one day of trading, I ended up receiving a five-figure airdrop, which is still incredible when I think about it now. The total value of the airdrops I received was over $20,000 at its peak. To be honest, I sold half of them midway through. After all, it was "free money," so it was best to lock in the profits. The dYdX airdrop gave me my first decent capital, and I dove right into DeFi. During the "DeFi summer," I did liquidity mining on Juldswap, making around $250 a day. Honestly, I miss those days terribly. The decline of airdrops Of course, such good times can’t last forever. After dYdX, I participated in airdrops for Scroll, Arbitrum, Optimism, and zkSync. The zkSync airdrop was the beginning of my “bad airdrop experience.” However, I’ll never forget the Scroll airdrop. Anticipation for it was sky-high, and even co-founder Sandy’s famous “lower expectations” tweet couldn’t dampen enthusiasm. Expectations were constantly raised, only to be met with disappointment. The Scroll airdrop was ridiculously low, a joke. The mood in the crypto community plummeted from anticipation to despair. Honestly, this airdrop left a lasting impression on me, and I vowed immediately to never participate in Layer 2 airdrop mining again. If it was just Scroll this time, maybe I could accept it. But what really makes me uncomfortable is that I realize that such "low-quality airdrops" will become the norm in the future. Today's airdrop chaos Fast forward to today, and the airdrop scene is abysmal. What were once "surprise airdrops" have long since become "industrialized Sybil attack-style airdrop farming." You have to spend months, even years, interacting with various protocols: cross-chain, adding liquidity, burning gas fees, and building so-called "user loyalty." Ultimately, whether you get an airdrop depends entirely on luck, and even if you do, the amount is pitifully small. Even more outrageous, there's even a practice of "airdrop claiming channels are only open for 48 hours." I think Sunrise was the first to do this. Even if you finally get your money, you'll find the amount isn't worth the time and effort you put in, and often comes with an absurdly demanding unlocking schedule. For example, the 0G Labs airdrop unlocks quarterly over 48 months—that's four years! There’s so much shit like this happening now that when I see those “Alpha Airdrop” tweets, my first reaction is, “Oh, another cheap airdrop.” Game between project owners and users The truth is: in recent years, users' mindsets have become utilitarian, and there's no need to sugarcoat it. People now use products solely for the rewards; no one is willing to spend hours clicking and contributing to the community just for the sake of a so-called ecosystem. What about the project owners? They certainly want loyal users, but they're even more interested in "stellar data" to show VCs, like high user numbers and a large community. These figures are enough to inflate valuations when preparing their fundraising pitches. Thus, the battle between users and project owners becomes a game of "data manipulation" versus "data prevention." The result is: neither side is happy. Users feel they’ve been tricked, and the project owners face the challenge of user retention. What should an airdrop look like? If I were to redesign the airdrop, I'd probably go back to the Uniswap model: no pie-in-the-sky promises, no leaderboards, and just give loyal users a surprise bonus one day. This alone would reduce the phenomenon of "industrialized airdrop manipulation" and lower users' unrealistic expectations. Alternatively, one can learn from Sui’s “pre-sale airdrop” model and set a reasonable fully diluted valuation (FDV) to give early contributors and users the opportunity to buy tokens at preferential terms. Currently, the closest to this model are probably Cysic and Boundless. They use a "level system" to reward users with pre-sale discounts based on their contribution to various activities in the ecosystem. Or, just cancel the airdrop altogether and focus on building a truly usable product: something with real product-market fit and a solid revenue model, rather than copying and pasting the same thing 200 times. Honestly, this would be in the long-term interest of the crypto community. Conclusion The current state of airdrops is abysmal. It’s a disservice to the users who invest their time in airdrops, and it doesn’t help projects build real communities. The end result is a situation where everyone feels they’ve been taken advantage of. Perhaps canceling the airdrop and instead building a product that allows everyone to make money would be a better option?Author: OxTochi Compiled by Chopper, Foresight News I still remember my first cryptocurrency airdrop like it was yesterday. It was 2020, and I was still busy completing bounties on Bitcointalk. One morning, I was woken by the ping of a WhatsApp message from a friend. "Have you used Uniswap?" he asked. I replied "Yes," and he said, "Then you should have 400 UNI tokens to claim, which is now worth over $1,000." I immediately went to Uniswap's Twitter page to find the claim link and sold them immediately after claiming them. It's that simple, free money falling from the sky. No forms to fill out, no levels to grind in Discord, no "you need to contribute to get it" rules or anything like that. Looking back now, that moment defined what airdrops should be: a surprise “subsidy” for users of your favorite product who are using it, instead of the worthless garbage activities that they are today. The Golden Age of Airdrops Later, I received a 1-inch airdrop. At that time, any wallet eligible for UNI could receive 1 inch. But it was the dYdX airdrop that truly changed my understanding of airdrops. To participate, I had to cross-chain my ETH to the dYdX protocol. At the time, most Layer 2 projects were still in the whitepaper stage, and cross-chain fees were incredibly high. I made a few trades to generate some volume, but it wasn't a lot, and then I withdrew my assets. With just one day of trading, I ended up receiving a five-figure airdrop, which is still incredible when I think about it now. The total value of the airdrops I received was over $20,000 at its peak. To be honest, I sold half of them midway through. After all, it was "free money," so it was best to lock in the profits. The dYdX airdrop gave me my first decent capital, and I dove right into DeFi. During the "DeFi summer," I did liquidity mining on Juldswap, making around $250 a day. Honestly, I miss those days terribly. The decline of airdrops Of course, such good times can’t last forever. After dYdX, I participated in airdrops for Scroll, Arbitrum, Optimism, and zkSync. The zkSync airdrop was the beginning of my “bad airdrop experience.” However, I’ll never forget the Scroll airdrop. Anticipation for it was sky-high, and even co-founder Sandy’s famous “lower expectations” tweet couldn’t dampen enthusiasm. Expectations were constantly raised, only to be met with disappointment. The Scroll airdrop was ridiculously low, a joke. The mood in the crypto community plummeted from anticipation to despair. Honestly, this airdrop left a lasting impression on me, and I vowed immediately to never participate in Layer 2 airdrop mining again. If it was just Scroll this time, maybe I could accept it. But what really makes me uncomfortable is that I realize that such "low-quality airdrops" will become the norm in the future. Today's airdrop chaos Fast forward to today, and the airdrop scene is abysmal. What were once "surprise airdrops" have long since become "industrialized Sybil attack-style airdrop farming." You have to spend months, even years, interacting with various protocols: cross-chain, adding liquidity, burning gas fees, and building so-called "user loyalty." Ultimately, whether you get an airdrop depends entirely on luck, and even if you do, the amount is pitifully small. Even more outrageous, there's even a practice of "airdrop claiming channels are only open for 48 hours." I think Sunrise was the first to do this. Even if you finally get your money, you'll find the amount isn't worth the time and effort you put in, and often comes with an absurdly demanding unlocking schedule. For example, the 0G Labs airdrop unlocks quarterly over 48 months—that's four years! There’s so much shit like this happening now that when I see those “Alpha Airdrop” tweets, my first reaction is, “Oh, another cheap airdrop.” Game between project owners and users The truth is: in recent years, users' mindsets have become utilitarian, and there's no need to sugarcoat it. People now use products solely for the rewards; no one is willing to spend hours clicking and contributing to the community just for the sake of a so-called ecosystem. What about the project owners? They certainly want loyal users, but they're even more interested in "stellar data" to show VCs, like high user numbers and a large community. These figures are enough to inflate valuations when preparing their fundraising pitches. Thus, the battle between users and project owners becomes a game of "data manipulation" versus "data prevention." The result is: neither side is happy. Users feel they’ve been tricked, and the project owners face the challenge of user retention. What should an airdrop look like? If I were to redesign the airdrop, I'd probably go back to the Uniswap model: no pie-in-the-sky promises, no leaderboards, and just give loyal users a surprise bonus one day. This alone would reduce the phenomenon of "industrialized airdrop manipulation" and lower users' unrealistic expectations. Alternatively, one can learn from Sui’s “pre-sale airdrop” model and set a reasonable fully diluted valuation (FDV) to give early contributors and users the opportunity to buy tokens at preferential terms. Currently, the closest to this model are probably Cysic and Boundless. They use a "level system" to reward users with pre-sale discounts based on their contribution to various activities in the ecosystem. Or, just cancel the airdrop altogether and focus on building a truly usable product: something with real product-market fit and a solid revenue model, rather than copying and pasting the same thing 200 times. Honestly, this would be in the long-term interest of the crypto community. Conclusion The current state of airdrops is abysmal. It’s a disservice to the users who invest their time in airdrops, and it doesn’t help projects build real communities. The end result is a situation where everyone feels they’ve been taken advantage of. Perhaps canceling the airdrop and instead building a product that allows everyone to make money would be a better option?
After 3 months of grinding, I only received $10: Should we cancel the airdrop?
Author: OxTochi
Compiled by Chopper, Foresight News
I still remember my first cryptocurrency airdrop like it was yesterday. It was 2020, and I was still busy completing bounties on Bitcointalk. One morning, I was woken by the ping of a WhatsApp message from a friend.
"Have you used Uniswap?" he asked. I replied "Yes," and he said, "Then you should have 400 UNI tokens to claim, which is now worth over $1,000." I immediately went to Uniswap's Twitter page to find the claim link and sold them immediately after claiming them.
It's that simple, free money falling from the sky. No forms to fill out, no levels to grind in Discord, no "you need to contribute to get it" rules or anything like that.
Looking back now, that moment defined what airdrops should be: a surprise “subsidy” for users of your favorite product who are using it, instead of the worthless garbage activities that they are today.
The Golden Age of Airdrops
Later, I received a 1-inch airdrop. At that time, any wallet eligible for UNI could receive 1 inch. But it was the dYdX airdrop that truly changed my understanding of airdrops.
To participate, I had to cross-chain my ETH to the dYdX protocol. At the time, most Layer 2 projects were still in the whitepaper stage, and cross-chain fees were incredibly high. I made a few trades to generate some volume, but it wasn't a lot, and then I withdrew my assets. With just one day of trading, I ended up receiving a five-figure airdrop, which is still incredible when I think about it now.
The total value of the airdrops I received was over $20,000 at its peak. To be honest, I sold half of them midway through. After all, it was "free money," so it was best to lock in the profits.
The dYdX airdrop gave me my first decent capital, and I dove right into DeFi. During the "DeFi summer," I did liquidity mining on Juldswap, making around $250 a day. Honestly, I miss those days terribly.
The decline of airdrops
Of course, such good times can’t last forever. After dYdX, I participated in airdrops for Scroll, Arbitrum, Optimism, and zkSync. The zkSync airdrop was the beginning of my “bad airdrop experience.”
However, I’ll never forget the Scroll airdrop. Anticipation for it was sky-high, and even co-founder Sandy’s famous “lower expectations” tweet couldn’t dampen enthusiasm.
Expectations were constantly raised, only to be met with disappointment. The Scroll airdrop was ridiculously low, a joke. The mood in the crypto community plummeted from anticipation to despair. Honestly, this airdrop left a lasting impression on me, and I vowed immediately to never participate in Layer 2 airdrop mining again.
If it was just Scroll this time, maybe I could accept it. But what really makes me uncomfortable is that I realize that such "low-quality airdrops" will become the norm in the future.
Today's airdrop chaos
Fast forward to today, and the airdrop scene is abysmal. What were once "surprise airdrops" have long since become "industrialized Sybil attack-style airdrop farming."
You have to spend months, even years, interacting with various protocols: cross-chain, adding liquidity, burning gas fees, and building so-called "user loyalty." Ultimately, whether you get an airdrop depends entirely on luck, and even if you do, the amount is pitifully small. Even more outrageous, there's even a practice of "airdrop claiming channels are only open for 48 hours." I think Sunrise was the first to do this.
Even if you finally get your money, you'll find the amount isn't worth the time and effort you put in, and often comes with an absurdly demanding unlocking schedule. For example, the 0G Labs airdrop unlocks quarterly over 48 months—that's four years!
There’s so much shit like this happening now that when I see those “Alpha Airdrop” tweets, my first reaction is, “Oh, another cheap airdrop.”
Game between project owners and users
The truth is: in recent years, users' mindsets have become utilitarian, and there's no need to sugarcoat it. People now use products solely for the rewards; no one is willing to spend hours clicking and contributing to the community just for the sake of a so-called ecosystem.
What about the project owners? They certainly want loyal users, but they're even more interested in "stellar data" to show VCs, like high user numbers and a large community. These figures are enough to inflate valuations when preparing their fundraising pitches. Thus, the battle between users and project owners becomes a game of "data manipulation" versus "data prevention."
The result is: neither side is happy. Users feel they’ve been tricked, and the project owners face the challenge of user retention.
What should an airdrop look like?
If I were to redesign the airdrop, I'd probably go back to the Uniswap model: no pie-in-the-sky promises, no leaderboards, and just give loyal users a surprise bonus one day. This alone would reduce the phenomenon of "industrialized airdrop manipulation" and lower users' unrealistic expectations.
Alternatively, one can learn from Sui’s “pre-sale airdrop” model and set a reasonable fully diluted valuation (FDV) to give early contributors and users the opportunity to buy tokens at preferential terms.
Currently, the closest to this model are probably Cysic and Boundless. They use a "level system" to reward users with pre-sale discounts based on their contribution to various activities in the ecosystem.
Or, just cancel the airdrop altogether and focus on building a truly usable product: something with real product-market fit and a solid revenue model, rather than copying and pasting the same thing 200 times. Honestly, this would be in the long-term interest of the crypto community.
Conclusion
The current state of airdrops is abysmal. It’s a disservice to the users who invest their time in airdrops, and it doesn’t help projects build real communities.
The end result is a situation where everyone feels they’ve been taken advantage of. Perhaps canceling the airdrop and instead building a product that allows everyone to make money would be a better option?
Market Opportunity
DAR Open Network Price(D)
$0.006775
$0.006775$0.006775
USD
DAR Open Network (D) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact crypto.news@mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.
You May Also Like
Morgan Stanley Files For Bank Charter To Offer Crypto Custody And Staking Services — Report
The post Morgan Stanley Files For Bank Charter To Offer Crypto Custody And Staking Services — Report appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Morgan Stanley
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/02/28 19:18
Trump Announces Major U.S. Combat Operations in Iran to Counter “Imminent Threats”
Trump Announces Major U.S. Combat Operations in Iran, Citing Imminent Threats
President Donald Trump announced that the United States has begun what he descri
Share
Hokanews2026/02/28 19:06
Michigan Bitcoin Bill: A Pivotal Step Towards State Crypto Reserves
BitcoinWorld Michigan Bitcoin Bill: A Pivotal Step Towards State Crypto Reserves A truly transformative development is unfolding in the heart of the Midwest, capturing the keen attention of cryptocurrency enthusiasts, financial strategists, and policymakers alike. The proposed Michigan Bitcoin bill, officially designated as House Bill 4087 (HB 4087), has successfully cleared its second reading in the Michigan House of Representatives. This pivotal legislative move, if enacted, would grant the state government the unprecedented authority to allocate a significant portion of its budget—specifically up to 10%—into digital assets such as Bitcoin. This advancement marks a potential paradigm shift in how states approach treasury management and investment strategies, positioning Michigan at the forefront of innovative financial policy within the United States. Understanding the Scope of the Michigan Bitcoin Bill (HB 4087) The journey of HB 4087 through the Michigan legislative process has garnered considerable interest. Following its successful second reading, the bill has now been referred to the influential Government Operations Committee for comprehensive review and detailed deliberation. This committee holds a critical responsibility in scrutinizing the practical implications, potential economic impacts, and any inherent challenges associated with such a groundbreaking financial proposal. At its core, this Michigan Bitcoin bill aims to empower the state with the flexibility to strategically diversify its investment portfolio, moving beyond traditional bonds and equities. The proposed 10% allocation limit for cryptocurrency investments suggests a balanced yet progressive approach. It acknowledges both the substantial potential rewards and the inherent volatility characteristic of the digital asset market. Cointelegraph, a respected cryptocurrency news outlet, was among the first to report on this significant progression, underscoring the accelerating mainstream interest in digital currencies among various state governments. Key Provision: Permits investment of up to 10% of the state’s budget in eligible cryptocurrencies. Legislative Status: Passed its second reading; currently under review by the Government Operations Committee. Core Objective: To strategically diversify state treasury investments. What Compels Michigan to Consider a Bitcoin Reserve? Michigan’s proactive exploration of a Bitcoin reserve bill is not an isolated event; rather, it reflects a growing, broader trend of institutional interest in digital assets. There are several compelling economic and strategic reasons why a state might consider such a forward-thinking move, ranging from enhancing economic diversification to strategically positioning itself in the rapidly evolving digital economy. One primary motivation is the potential for substantial returns on investment. Historically, Bitcoin has demonstrated periods of explosive growth, offering a powerful hedge against inflationary pressures and a viable pathway to potentially grow state reserves more rapidly than traditional, lower-yield investments. Furthermore, by openly embracing cryptocurrency, Michigan could significantly signal its commitment to technological innovation. This could, in turn, attract leading blockchain companies, tech startups, and highly skilled talent to the state, fostering a vibrant ecosystem for future economic development. States like Texas and cities like Miami have already begun exploring similar initiatives, recognizing the long-term benefits. Many financial experts suggest that including digital assets in a state’s comprehensive investment strategy could offer: Enhanced Portfolio Diversification: Reducing over-reliance on conventional asset classes. Inflationary Hedge: Bitcoin’s limited supply makes it an attractive asset during periods of economic uncertainty. Technological Leadership: Solidifying Michigan’s reputation as an innovation-friendly state. Stimulated Economic Growth: Attracting crypto and blockchain-related businesses. Navigating the Inherent Challenges of the Michigan Bitcoin Bill While the potential benefits of the Michigan Bitcoin bill are indeed compelling, the path to its successful implementation is undeniably fraught with inherent hurdles. Investing in the cryptocurrency market, particularly in assets like Bitcoin, comes with a unique set of risks that demand meticulous consideration, robust regulatory frameworks, and sophisticated risk management strategies. The most prominent challenge remains market volatility. Cryptocurrency prices are notoriously susceptible to dramatic fluctuations, which could lead to significant gains or, conversely, substantial losses for state funds within relatively short periods. Moreover, the global regulatory landscape for digital assets is still in its nascent stages and continues to evolve, creating an environment of uncertainty that needs careful navigation. The Government Operations Committee will undoubtedly be tasked with thoroughly examining these concerns, working to establish clear, comprehensive guidelines and stringent safeguards to protect the state’s financial interests. Additionally, ensuring the secure management and storage of digital assets is paramount, requiring specialized expertise, cutting-edge infrastructure, and continuous vigilance to prevent cyberattacks or potential loss. Therefore, the successful and responsible implementation of this pioneering legislation will critically depend on: Comprehensive Risk Management: Developing strategies to mitigate market volatility. Clear Regulatory Frameworks: Establishing unambiguous legal and operational guidelines for crypto investments. Advanced Security Measures: Implementing state-of-the-art protocols to protect digital assets. Public Transparency and Education: Ensuring clear communication and understanding among citizens. What’s the Next Step for Michigan’s Pioneering Crypto Legislation? The referral of the Michigan Bitcoin bill to the Government Operations Committee signifies a critical and deliberative phase in its legislative journey. It is expected that the committee will conduct extensive, in-depth hearings, gather expert testimonies from financial professionals and blockchain specialists, and meticulously consider potential amendments to further refine and strengthen the legislation. This rigorous process is absolutely essential to ensure the bill is comprehensive, addresses all conceivable concerns, and ultimately serves the best long-term financial interests of the state and its citizens. Should the bill successfully navigate the committee stage, it would then proceed to a full vote within the Michigan House of Representatives. If approved there, it would then advance to the Senate for their independent review and vote. Finally, if it garners approval from both chambers, the bill would be sent to the Governor for signature, officially becoming law. This multi-stage democratic process underscores the robust checks and balances in place, ensuring thorough scrutiny before any major policy shift. The ongoing discussions and decisions surrounding this landmark bill could indeed set a powerful precedent for other states across the nation that are considering similar innovative investment strategies. In conclusion, the significant advancement of the Michigan Bitcoin bill represents a truly momentous occasion in the evolving and dynamic relationship between state governments and digital currencies. By actively exploring the possibility of investing in Bitcoin, Michigan is not merely seeking new avenues for potential financial growth but is also boldly embracing the future of finance itself. While challenges and complexities undoubtedly exist, the proactive and forward-thinking steps taken by the Michigan House of Representatives unequivocally highlight a commendable willingness to innovate and adapt in an increasingly digital and interconnected world. This legislative journey will be closely watched by financial institutions and governments globally, potentially paving the way for other states to follow suit in exploring the vast and transformative potential of cryptocurrency reserves. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Q1: What is HB 4087? A: HB 4087, or House Bill 4087, is a proposed Michigan Bitcoin bill that would permit the state government to invest a portion of its budget, specifically up to 10%, into cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin. Q2: What does the Michigan Bitcoin bill propose? A: The bill proposes to allow the state of Michigan to diversify its treasury investments by including digital assets, with a cap of 10% of the state’s total budget allocated for such investments. Q3: What are the potential benefits of this bill for Michigan? A: Potential benefits include portfolio diversification, a hedge against inflation, attracting tech innovation and businesses to Michigan, and the possibility of higher returns on state investments. Q4: What are the main challenges associated with state investment in Bitcoin? A: Key challenges involve managing market volatility, navigating an evolving regulatory landscape, ensuring robust security measures for digital assets, and maintaining public transparency and understanding. Q5: What are the next steps for the Michigan Bitcoin bill? A: After passing its second reading, the bill has been sent to the Government Operations Committee for further review. If approved there, it will proceed to a full House vote, then the Senate, and finally to the Governor for signature to become law. Share This Insight Did you find this update on Michigan’s pioneering crypto legislation insightful? Share this article with your network on social media to spread awareness about the evolving landscape of state government and cryptocurrency. Your engagement helps us foster informed discussions about the future of finance! To learn more about the latest crypto market trends, explore our article on key developments shaping Bitcoin institutional adoption. This post Michigan Bitcoin Bill: A Pivotal Step Towards State Crypto Reserves first appeared on BitcoinWorld.
Share
Coinstats2025/09/20 00:40