Recently, people on the blockchain keep treating “coincidental transfers” as conspiracy theories, and it’s both a little funny and a bit worrying to me. The truth is that many so-called coincidences, once you break them down, are basically: the same batch of funds coming from one source → an intermediary address (possibly a CEX hot wallet/aggregator) → distribution to a bunch of new addresses, where the timing is close enough that it starts to look like coordination. Put simply, don’t jump to conclusions—stretch the timeline a bit and take a look at the points where the liquidity pools intersect, and that will explain most of it.

The same thing applies to those “points” expectations on testnets too. After all, when a lot of people are betting on whether the mainnet will issue tokens, it’s even easier to see on-chain patterns like bulk moving and cross-transfers that leave traces. Personally, I just stick to layered permissions and hardware isolation. If I can avoid touching any unknown interactions, I won’t—I'd rather have fewer chances than bury a minefield for myself.