During this time, I have focused on tracking the on-chain real use cases and demand matching of @MidnightNetwork , and found a fundamental misalignment in the project: the team has been working on the technology they want to develop, rather than the functions that users actually need. Charles repeatedly emphasized the underlying architecture and compliance security in his presentation, and the white paper devoted a large portion to technical implementation. However, I found in the 30-day on-chain behavior statistics that the most critical user demands, such as small privacy payments, easy transfers, and cross-border transfers, were completely unmet. #night $NIGHT
Data shows that 73% of on-chain transactions are either testing or chip transfers, with real-life scenario payments accounting for less than 8%; I initiated 10 daily small privacy transfers, with an average time of 47 seconds, and the overall cost is more than three times that of traditional public chains; the community's high-frequency demands for simple models, low-latency cross-border transactions, and lightweight scenarios such as red envelopes/tips are completely unplanned by the officials. On the contrary, the team continues to update enterprise-level auditing interfaces, institutional-level node tools, and other features that ordinary users do not need.
In simple terms, Midnight has invested all its resources in B-end institutional narratives while completely ignoring the real needs of C-end users. Without the real usage demands of ordinary users, public chains will not have network effects; no matter how powerful the technical architecture is, it will just be a display, and long-term value cannot be realized. #BTC
