$1000 makes you a Top 100 RXD holder. How you fix this liquidity?

[EduApps]

I was digging through some PoW networks recently and stumbled upon Radiant (RXD).
Looking at their documentation, the tech actually sounds insane: they are claiming Turing-complete smart contracts directly on a UTXO architecture. Basically trying to do what EVMs do, but keeping the scalability and security of a Bitcoin-like PoW model (using SHA512256d).

I ran the numbers on their current market depth, and the liquidity is an absolute ghost town. With roughly $1,000, you can basically buy your way into the Top 100 holders.

So what is the catch here?
For those who understand UTXO contract induction or have actually mined this: Is there a fundamental technical flaw in their code that keeps miners and market makers away? Or is this just a case of a network with solid tech that has zero marketing and is trapped in a liquidity black hole?

How does a PoW chain even recover from liquidity this low? And for the blockchain builders, If this is lack of marketing. What are your suggestions to fix this ugly price?

[JaanusRaim]

I do not want to fix it, I want to exploit it 

[hugeblack]

There is a long list of good projects, but they did not receive enough attention, which led to their price being lower than the fair price. Technical development is not sufficient.
If you strongly believe in the project, invest $500. In the end, losing it will not affect your life.

[jossiel]

I ran the numbers on their current market depth, and the liquidity is an absolute ghost town. With roughly $1,000, you can basically buy your way into the Top 100 holders.

And then what's next?

You're going to hold it on an unknown time because with its problem that it shows, the lack of liquidity will just eat the money that you have put into it.

That $1k, is that affordable to you? if so then be one of the top 100 holders. But that's quite big for me to invest into a project that shows the sign of not doing good.

[justdimin]

I ran the numbers on their current market depth, and the liquidity is an absolute ghost town. With roughly $1,000, you can basically buy your way into the Top 100 holders.

And then what's next?

You're going to hold it on an unknown time because with its problem that it shows, the lack of liquidity will just eat the money that you have put into it.

That $1k, is that affordable to you? if so then be one of the top 100 holders. But that's quite big for me to invest into a project that shows the sign of not doing good.

Then nothing; you are holding a bag. That is what happens when a project dies: some people just give up and do not sell and let it sit there, because they know if they want to sell it, then they would crash the market and would not get even half of it. So right now, if you wanted to sell a thousand dollars worth of it, at today's price, the crash would be so severe that you would probably end up with nothing in return and maybe like half of that thousand dollars would be real sale.

So most people, mainly people who made profit from other stuff, just let these rot and not even look at it anymore. To them it is not "let's see how it is doing today"; they spend months, even years, without even checking, forgetting that it exists. Many people have bags like that all over, in dozens of projects, with the hopes that maybe one day one of them will revive, and if not, then they are all worthless anyway, so they just let them stay there as bags. No reason to get in right now; if you got in all the way back when it had potential, you may not sell now, but there is no reason to buy right now.

[asriloni]

You were focusing too much on the technical aspect until you didn't aware how this project death. This project death because their dumb developers opened the zip file contained malware from someone else, then all of their money drained.

I agreed their whitepapre sounds insane, but it's not with people who write them. No professional developers would be opening or downloading a malicious zip file sent to them.

Other than that the money lost is already lost forever. So this one already remembered as the project that burned investor money. So whatever the way you try to revive this, it will never work because everything related to the radiant already damaged.

The only best thing to do just to get away from this one, and let this garbage token die forever.

[zasad@]

I was digging through some PoW networks recently and stumbled upon Radiant (RXD).
Looking at their documentation, the tech actually sounds insane: they are claiming Turing-complete smart contracts directly on a UTXO architecture. Basically trying to do what EVMs do, but keeping the scalability and security of a Bitcoin-like PoW model (using SHA512256d).

I ran the numbers on their current market depth, and the liquidity is an absolute ghost town. With roughly $1,000, you can basically buy your way into the Top 100 holders.

So what is the catch here?
For those who understand UTXO contract induction or have actually mined this: Is there a fundamental technical flaw in their code that keeps miners and market makers away? Or is this just a case of a network with solid tech that has zero marketing and is trapped in a liquidity black hole?

How does a PoW chain even recover from liquidity this low? And for the blockchain builders, If this is lack of marketing. What are your suggestions to fix this ugly price?

Crypto lending protocol Radiant Capital says it will start closing down as it failed to establish a “viable path forward” after North Korea exploited it for $50 million in October 2024.

"Radiant’s decentralized autonomous organization said in a blog post on Monday that its inability to recover the stolen funds, secure new capital and maintain a runway to continue operating responsibly forced it to wind down."

If you're asking for investment advice, there are many more suitable projects on the market. I wouldn't invest in them after this news.