Recently, looking at those "coincidental transfers" on the blockchain, don't just dismiss them as insider info. Many times, when you break them down, they are just very ordinary paths: exchange hot wallets → intermediate aggregation addresses → cross-chain/bridges → then distributed to a bunch of new addresses, finally landing in protocols. It looks rehearsed, but actually it's just the process scaring people. Anyway, I now prefer to first clarify the timeline, then see if the same funds are just circulating, whether there are fixed landing points and fee patterns, otherwise it's easy to overthink.

Recently, someone also discussed the collapse of blockchain games. Honestly, it's inflation + studios ramping up activity, causing the token price to spiral. On-chain transfers become more like "lively" scenes, but when you break down the paths, they are full of settlement and selling pressure traces... My partner even complained about me: "You look at these addresses like investigating a case, but they're just people batch-withdrawing?" Alright, for now, I'll compare the data slowly, no need to rush to conclusions.