After waking up from a nap, I saw that Sentient was a new release of Binance Wallet and the token economics was also announced the day before yesterday. It seems that the most popular response was the 2% public sale. I think the design is quite rational, and attaches great importance to the community. It is a rare conscience project in the cryptocurrency industry - a top AI track project. Below is a detailed analysis of why conscience exists. 65.55% of the total SENT is allocated to community related purposes: 44%: Community Incentives&Airdrops 19.55%: Ecology&R&D 2%: Public Fundraising More importantly, the unlocking method. Community airdrops will be fully unlocked in TGE, while other community and ecological related parts will be released linearly over a period of 4 years. This means that the main source of early circulation was essentially real users who participated in the network and contributed to GRID. In sharp contrast, there is a lock up between the team and investors. The team accounts for 22%, but TGE is not unlocked at all and a one-year clip is set, followed by a linear release for up to 6 years; The normal cryptocurrency project team unlocks within 2-4 years. Investors account for 12.45% of the total, and if TGE is not unlocked, it will be gradually released over a period of 4 years after a one-year clip. The design belongs to the extreme long-term bias, almost cutting off the common source of risk of "early insider selling pressure". If the allocation structure determines who holds the advantageous position, then the inflation model determines whether this advantage will be continuously diluted. Sentient will control annual inflation at 2% and only enter the community incentive pool to reward verifiable contributions in GRID. More importantly, the unused parts from that year will be directly locked in, rather than carried over to the next year. This design avoids creating ineffective inflation in order to 'run out of budget' and makes long-term supply more predictable. In this context, looking at the public offering itself, the logic will be much clearer. The proportion of public funds is only 2%, but it is fully unlocked by TGE, and the official statement is that the FDV of public funds will be lower than that of private funds. This means that public offerings are not intended to solve liquidity problems, nor are they meant to allow communities to undertake early capital exits, but rather as an entry point for a wider range of participants to enter the network ownership structure in the early stages. The market has been much better these days, and Bitcoin has skyrocketed, slowly bringing back market liquidity. Winter is over, can spring still be far away?