Have you noticed this phenomenon—recently, a batch of UK companies following the trend to deploy BTC have collectively fallen into losses? Honestly, this is not surprising at all; institutions are never an "invincible myth." Many times, they are just more elaborately packaged gamblers.

Looking back at the last market cycle, when BTC was at 69,000, institutions were rushing to buy in; by over 100,000, they were still shouting "add more, add more." Retail investors saw this and got anxious: "If even they are not afraid, what are we afraid of?" But the result? The crowd is always most enthusiastic at the top and most desperate at the bottom. While institutions may look better on paper, the fundamental issue of losing money has never changed.

Rather than mocking institutions for falling into traps, it's better to ask yourself a real question: when even professionals can make mistakes, and authoritative voices keep changing, what should we really trust? Is it those easily reversible "professional advice," or the underlying logic that is fully transparent, driven by mathematics and on-chain rules, and verifiable by everyone?

This is precisely why more and more people are beginning to pay attention to infrastructure like USDD. It doesn't rely on stories of institutional endorsement; it does one thing: through on-chain over-collateralization, it makes the value peg of stablecoins clear and verifiable. Every collateralization, every flow is recorded on the chain, and the operating mechanism is open to all. This mindset of "I don't trust authority, I trust data" may be the real experience that survives market lessons.