Recently, a short article written by Satya has been circulating in the tech community, introducing a concept worth pondering for crypto friends: In the AI era, the process of enterprises using models is quietly paying an "invisible cost". Starting from this observation, this article helps you understand this concept and see if the "decentralized AI" track that the crypto circle has been quietly laying out in recent years—for example, Bittensor (TAO) and Gensyn ($AI)—provides a solution. <h2>Starting from Satya's Observation</h2> Satya's article references a paradox proposed long ago by economist Kenneth Arrow: the buyer of information must first "know" the information to judge whether it is worth buying, but once known, it has essentially been obtained for free, without needing to pay. This is very disadvantageous for the "seller"—the seller risks leaking knowledge without getting paid. This is called the "Arrow Information Paradox". Satya observes that the AI era has reversed this script. He points out that now it is the "buyer" who bears the risk. For enterprises to make AI models effective, they must feed in their proprietary knowledge—internal processes, industry know-how, and even every instance of "correcting the model's wrong answers". You end up paying twice: once for the subscription fee or API cost, and again with "knowledge exposure" that is more valuable than money. Satya calls this phenomenon the Reverse Information Paradox. What's more troubling, Satya notes, is that this process is one-way and compounds. Every time you correct the model or teach it details, it gets distilled into the model provider's "institutional knowledge"—something competitors cannot buy with money, and the loss is almost imperceptible: one correction, one conversation, one evaluation, accumulating slowly. The longer it goes, the better the model provider understands you, while you have no idea what it has learned. In short: the more you use it and the more details you teach, the more the model provider understands your industry, yet you have no way to reclaim that "understanding you" capability for yourself. <h2>What Solution Can Crypto Offer?</h2> The blockchain community has recently been talking a lot about "decentralized AI training", which aims to address the core pain point of this paradox—keeping training and data sovereignty "within your own boundaries" rather than handing it over to a single model provider. The two leading examples are Bittensor and Gensyn. Case 1: Bittensor (TAO)—Using Blockchain as a "Intelligence Market" Bittensor's logic is interesting: instead of locking AI training in the server rooms of a few companies, turn it into an open market—anyone can contribute compute or models and earn TAO token rewards based on contribution quality. The network is currently divided into over a hundred "subnets", each focused on different tasks, ranging from text generation and code writing to protein structure prediction. In March 2026, Bittensor's Templar subnet achieved something notable: over 70 independent contributors who did not know each other collaborated via regular internet connections and consumer-grade hardware to train a 72-billion-parameter language model called "Covenant-72B". Some media have called this the "DeepSeek moment" for decentralized AI—the key point is not that it outperformed any top model, but that it proved "collaborative training" is technically feasible without relying on a single giant's server room. What made this possible was not more compute than others, but a technology called SparseLoCo—through methods like sparsification and 2-bit quantization, it drastically reduced the data volume that needs to be synchronized between training nodes, lowering communication overhead by 146 times. This is one piece of the puzzle in solving the "Reverse Information Paradox": training does not have to be centralized in a single model provider's hands; data and contribution records stay on-chain with transparent rules. Case 2: Gensyn ($AI)—Using Cryptography to Prove "Who Really Did the Work" If Bittensor solves "who can participate in training", Gensyn addresses the other half: "how to prove that training actually happened, rather than someone faking computations to claim rewards". Gensyn's core design is a mechanism called REE (Reproducible Execution Environment), which uses cryptographic proofs to verify each node's computation results without blindly trusting any single participant. Its goal is to connect idle gaming PCs, data centers, and even future smartphone compute worldwide into an open, verifiable compute supercluster as an alternative to centralized clouds like AWS and Google Cloud. In April this year, Gensyn's flagship application Delphi officially launched on mainnet—a decentralized prediction market platform arbitrated by AI, targeting the creator economy market worth over $250 billion. At the same time, the $AI token was listed, with its first-day trading surging then plummeting sharply—a volatile characteristic that crypto newcomers should pay special attention to, which we will discuss later in terms of investment risks. <h2>Honestly Facing It: Speed Remains the Biggest Bottleneck</h2> If we stop here, it might easily give the impression that decentralized training has already caught up with or even surpassed centralized giants. Honestly, it has not. Decentralized training inherently faces two additional layers of cost: Communication latency: In centralized server rooms, GPUs are centimeters apart with nanosecond-level bandwidth; in decentralized networks, nodes are scattered globally, relying on regular internet connections, so the latency in synchronizing training gradients is vastly different. Verification overhead: You must prove that each node actually performed the computation it claims, rather than faking results to claim rewards. Whether using Bittensor's "fingerprint matching" or Gensyn's cryptographic proofs, this verification layer itself consumes compute and time. Current public industry test data shows that some pipelining techniques can reduce training iteration time by up to 55% when nodes fail, and testnets have completed millions of training tasks using consumer-grade GPUs, proving that fine-tuning of small-to-medium models is feasible—but scaling to "frontier model" sizes with hundreds of billions of parameters has not yet been validated. In plain terms: decentralized AI training has currently proven it "can be done", but not that it "can compete at the most cutting-edge scale with centralized supercomputers from OpenAI, Anthropic, and similar players". This is why understanding this sector requires focusing on technical progress, not just narratives. <h2>Investment Narrative: Are TAO and Gensyn Tokens Worth Watching?</h2> While this is educational, crypto friends will ultimately ask: how does this relate to my investment portfolio? Here are some key points the market is currently watching, but first: the following content is only a compilation of market information and does not constitute investment advice. Crypto assets are highly volatile; always do your own research and assess your risk tolerance before investing. Structural highlights for TAO: TAO follows a Bitcoin-like four-year halving mechanism. The first halving will complete in December 2025, reducing daily issuance from approximately 7,200 tokens to 3,600, creating structural tightening on the supply side. Institutional capital has entered: In Q1 this year, Nvidia invested $420 million and Polychain Capital added $200 million, totaling approximately $620 million in institutional inflows. Grayscale has submitted an ETF application for TAO; if approved, it would be the first exchange-traded product in the US tracking TAO. Risks cannot be ignored either: Bittensor was earlier involved in a governance dispute with Covenant AI, with the other party accusing the network of "decentralization theater"—appearing decentralized but actually controlled by a few people. This reminds us that decentralization narratives must withstand scrutiny of actual governance structures, not just whitepapers. Gensyn's $AI token experienced extreme volatility on its listing day, dropping over 40% from its peak in a short time, highlighting the high-leverage, high-volatility nature of new token launches. Newcomers should be especially cautious with position management. <h2>Conclusion: Two Answers, One Problem</h2> The Reverse Information Paradox reminds us of one thing—in the AI era, "using intelligence" itself comes at a cost. Bittensor and Gensyn attempt to provide one kind of answer: returning ownership of training infrastructure from a few companies to a broader group of participants. But to be honest, this path has not yet truly solved the problem; it has only proposed a direction. Speed and scale are still catching up with centralized giants, governance disputes have not been fully resolved, and training frontier models at the hundred-billion-parameter scale has not yet been proven feasible. As an emerging rather than mature narrative, it is worth crypto newcomers taking time to understand what "problem" it aims to solve and continuously track technical progress, rather than assuming the solution is already in place and only chasing token price movements.

What is the Reverse Information Paradox? Can Bittensor and Gensyn Solve This Problem?

Bitcoin is currently standing above $78,000, with both technical indicators and on-chain data sending the same signal: an attempt to build a bottom is underway, leaning bullish in direction, but it has not yet faced a real test. Technical Analysis: Both 200MAs Have Been Recovered The price has simultaneously moved above the daily 200MA and the weekly 200MA.<img src="https://static2.fansone.co/images/81f670a3-1231-4fcc-837c-d838038111f3.avif" />After breaking below the weekly 200MA in early June this year, the price oscillated around the 200WMA for the next two months until it broke out strongly on August 19. This pattern also appeared in 2019. Since the 200WMA has always been strong support, historically Bitcoin bear markets have consolidated near this zone for up to about 1 year and 3 months, or as short as about 3 weeks. Therefore, repeated fluctuations in this range can be seen as a common signal of the bottom-building phase.<img src="https://static2.fansone.co/images/bcd2a061-a651-45ca-a8d2-59924a32a42b.avif" />However, there is still one hurdle above: the daily 365MA (around $82K). On September 3, the price once surged to $82,293 and touched this line, only to be pushed back near $79,000. Whether the daily 365MA can hold with a close is the key technical resistance to watch closely next. On-Chain Data: STH/LTH Cost Basis Has Not Yet Been Retested Comparing the STH &amp; LTH Realized Price chart, the current price is above the average cost of both short-term and long-term holders.<img src="https://static2.fansone.co/images/f0a4e0ef-f246-436c-af70-5bf26ba63653.avif" />Looking at SOPR data: STH-SOPR is hovering just above 1.00 (short-term buyers are roughly breaking even, market sentiment is neutral), while LTH-SOPR continues to sit at levels representing cycle bottoms (below 1). <img src="https://static2.fansone.co/images/99ac4124-f86c-476e-9250-72a1efce4085.avif" /><img src="https://static2.fansone.co/images/d7e86767-8617-41cf-8d75-976a21bb8576.avif" />Unrealized Profit/Loss <a href="https://metaverse9429.com/btc-dashboard/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">NUPL sits at 0.32</a> (&gt;0 indicates holders are on average in slight profit), and Market Value to Realized Value <a href="https://metaverse9429.com/btc-dashboard/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">MVRV sits at 1.4</a> (&gt;1 indicates the market trades at a premium to realized cost), both falling in the optimistic recovery or transition zone. Together these figures point to: sentiment turning positive, but far from overheated. This is a healthy signal, though it also means the bottom support has not yet undergone a real stress test. Don't Ignore: This Rally Has a Short Squeeze Component The sharp surge from August 19-21 saw over 17,000 BTC in short positions forcibly liquidated, meaning it was partly "squeezed" higher rather than purely built on new buying. Spot Cumulative Volume Delta (CVD) hit a new range high positive at the same time, showing spot buyers also joined in. However, this momentum has recently turned negative while price remains supported at high levels, indicating selling pressure and support are still battling without a clear winner.<img src="https://static2.fansone.co/images/48ba5f85-1c98-496d-85db-937a3d8a22fc.avif" />Conclusion The current setup is "technicals turning bullish, on-chain sentiment turning positive, but bottom support and overhead resistance have not yet been truly validated." Recovering the 200-week/daily moving averages is solid progress, and the fact that the STH/LTH cost basis has not been broken is a plus. Yet until the 365MA is reclaimed with a close and spot buying momentum returns, this remains an "attempt to leave the bottom," not a "confirmation of leaving the bottom." The closing prices over the next few weeks will be the most critical window to validate this thesis.

Emerging from the Bottom, But Not Yet Steady 

Debasement Trade is one of the hottest macro narratives from late August to now. Its core logic is: when investors believe the dollar's purchasing power will continue to erode due to "high debt + high deficits + policy intervention in the bond market", funds will shift to scarce assets (gold, Bitcoin, some crypto assets) as a hedge. <h2>What is Debasement Trade?</h2> <ul><li>Definition: Investors expect fiat currencies (especially the USD) to lose long-term purchasing power, so they reduce holdings in cash and sovereign debt while increasing exposure to "scarce, inflation-resistant, non-sovereign" assets such as gold and Bitcoin.</li><li>Trigger conditions: Expanding fiscal deficits, rising government debt, central banks or treasuries intervening in bond markets to "suppress long-end yields" (e.g., expanding long-term Treasury buybacks), and rising inflation expectations.</li></ul> <h2>Why is it heating up again now? Three catalysts</h2> U.S. federal debt breaks through $40 trillion <ul><li>On 8/18, U.S. Treasury debt officially surpassed $40 trillion, reaching approximately $40.1 trillion by 8/25; the CBO projects a FY2026 deficit of about $1.9 trillion (roughly 6% of GDP), with interest payments and mandatory spending continuing to push deficits higher.</li><li>High debt + high deficits = markets worry that future debt will only be diluted through "inflation + monetization", which is exactly the core narrative of Debasement Trade.</li></ul> <h2>Treasury expands long-term Treasury buybacks, intervening in the yield curve</h2> <ul><li>Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced an expansion of long-term Treasury buybacks aimed at lowering long-end yields; markets interpreted this as a signal of "fiscal dominance", reinforcing expectations of long-term USD depreciation.</li><li>Result: The dollar weakened while gold and Bitcoin strengthened in tandem; Bitcoin briefly broke above $80,000 and gold hit a three-month high in mid-to-late August.</li></ul> <h2>Geopolitical risks and oil prices lift inflation expectations</h2> <ul><li>Escalating U.S.-Iran tensions and Brent crude returning to $90/barrel have markets concerned that inflation will remain sticky, making it harder for the Fed to ease policy and possibly even prompting rate hikes, further reinforcing the incentive to "hold physical/scarce assets".</li></ul> <h2>Market evidence: Bitcoin-gold correlation surges</h2> <ul><li>Grayscale research shows Bitcoin's 90-day correlation with gold rising from near 0% at the start of the year to over 50%, while its correlation with the Nasdaq 100 fell from 60%+ to around 33%, indicating Bitcoin is shifting from "tech-stock beta" toward "gold-style hedging".</li><li>BlackRock Digital Assets head Mitchnick also noted that debt and deficit concerns are driving capital toward Bitcoin and gold, strengthening Bitcoin's macro allocation case.</li><li>Bernstein directly lists Debasement Trade as one of Bitcoin's main medium- to long-term upside drivers, projecting a mid-2027 target of $150,000 and $300,000 by 2029.</li></ul> <h2>But Debasement Trade is not a one-way street: Fed hawks are the biggest headwind</h2> <ul><li>Waller's hawkish Jackson Hole speech (emphasizing inflation not yet under control and more work to do) caused markets to reprice September rate-hike odds to around 60%, strengthening the dollar and short-end yields while gold and Bitcoin pulled back in tandem.</li><li>Goldman Sachs scenario analysis indicates that if the Fed does hike, gold could fall back to $4,400, also suppressing short-term momentum for the "gold-Bitcoin Debasement Trade".</li><li>In other words, Debasement Trade is a "long-term structural narrative", but the short term remains dominated by "interest rates and the dollar"; when markets believe the Fed will fight inflation with rate hikes, valuations of scarce assets will first come under pressure.</li></ul> <h2>Implications for Bitcoin: Repricing from "risk asset" to "macro hedge"</h2> <ul><li>If Debasement Trade continues to unfold, Bitcoin will increasingly be viewed as "digital gold" rather than "tech-stock beta", with capital sources expanding from crypto speculators to macro funds and sovereign/institutional allocators.</li><li>Grayscale even highlighted Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Zcash as potential beneficiaries due to their scarcity, decentralization, and censorship resistance, aligning with the need for "non-sovereign value storage".</li><li>Investors should still note: the 90-day correlation is a short-term indicator; if Fed hawkishness persists and the dollar strengthens, Bitcoin may still pull back in tandem with gold rather than rising unilaterally.</li></ul> <h2>What should investors watch?</h2> <ul><li>Fiscal side: Whether U.S. Treasury debt continues to climb, whether Treasury buyback policy expands, and whether CBO deficit forecasts are revised upward.</li><li>Monetary side: The Fed's stance on inflation and rate hikes, the September FOMC rate decision, the DXY dollar index, and the 10-year real yield.</li><li>Asset side: Whether Bitcoin-gold correlation remains elevated, whether gold holds key support (e.g., $4,410–$4,320), and whether Bitcoin ETF flows remain net positive.</li></ul> Overall, Debasement Trade provides Bitcoin with a "macro hedge" medium- to long-term narrative, but short-term price action still hinges on the Fed-dollar tug-of-war: if markets believe "the debt problem can ultimately only be solved through inflation", demand for Bitcoin and gold allocations will keep rising. If the Fed insists on combating inflation with rate hikes, scarce assets will first undergo a valuation correction before waiting for the next liquidity inflection point.

Debasement Trade's Impact on Bitcoin #BTC

<h2>TL;DR</h2> MSTR's accumulation flywheel has clearly lost momentum, but 'forced treasury liquidation' is not the base-case scenario in the near term. Two things must be viewed separately: first, 'common stock mNAV falling below 1, impairing the equity-financed accumulation thesis'—this is already happening; second, 'forced BTC treasury liquidation'—this requires more extreme conditions to materialize. The more accurate description now is: the flywheel has entered contraction mode, not imminent collapse. As of June 30, 2026, Strategy holds 847,363 BTC, with BTC Reserve around $50B, common stock market cap $30.6B, Debt $6.75B, Preferred $15.47B, USD Reserve $1.4B, and annual preferred dividend $1.71B. Average BTC price is approximately $59K, while MSTR's average cost basis is $75,651, resulting in an overall unrealized loss of about $13.5B. <h2>Current Situation: Understanding MSTR Flywheel Mechanics</h2> MSTR's business model essentially converts the company's capital structure into a high-beta BTC financing vehicle. The flywheel logic is as follows: Market willing to pay a premium for the 'crypto treasury' narrative → MSTR share price trades above BTC NAV (i.e., mNAV &gt; 1) → Company raises capital via common stock ATM, preferred stock, and convertible notes → Buys more BTC → BTC per share rises → Share price rises further → Premium expands → Repeat financing. <img src="https://static2.fansone.co/images/e5557073-68d0-479f-b136-bd324d18c59f.avif" /> This flywheel self-reinforces in an environment where BTC is rising and mNAV maintains a high premium. The problem is that the flywheel is bidirectional—once conditions reverse, it will likewise self-contract. The current issue is that the flywheel is moving along the right-hand path. <h2>Why No Immediate Liquidation? First Understand What mNAV Means</h2> Two seemingly divergent figures are circulating: Strategy's official site shows mNAV at 1.02x, yet many analysts claim common stock mNAV has fallen to around 0.66x. Both numbers are correct; they simply answer different questions. <img src="https://static2.fansone.co/images/282e0ec0-64fc-422e-962a-aabbd16372c2.avif" />The official 1.02x includes debt and preferred stock in the numerator (Enterprise Value), so the overall picture still appears healthy. However, to assess whether the equity issuance flywheel remains viable, one must look at the discount of common equity relative to BTC net assets—i.e., the 0.6–0.7x range. This discount means the market is now buying $1 of BTC exposure for $0.6–0.7; issuing common stock to buy BTC is no longer accretive and has become dilutive. This is the core signal that the flywheel has lost momentum. But loss of momentum does not equal liquidation. MSTR's convertible notes are senior unsecured obligations with no BTC collateral and no margin call; they will not automatically liquidate if BTC falls to a certain price. Asset coverage remains high: even if BTC drops to $20K, BTC Reserve would still be approximately $16.9B, providing 2.5x coverage over $6.75B in Debt. <h2>The Real Path of the Death Spiral</h2> MSTR's death spiral is not a mechanical liquidation but the reversal of the reflexive financing flywheel. Its path roughly unfolds as follows: <ol><li>BTC declines → BTC Reserve shrinks, share price comes under pressure</li><li>Common stock mNAV remains below 1 → ATM issuance interpreted by the market as dilution, core flywheel stalls</li><li>Preferred stock financing costs rise → $1.71B annual dividend burden becomes increasingly heavy</li><li>USD Reserve depletes → Current $1.4B covers only about 9.8 months of dividends</li><li>If capital markets close to MSTR → Only option left is selling BTC for liquidity</li><li>If selling BTC is interpreted as 'narrative broken' → Share price falls further, mNAV compresses, reflexive negative loop forms</li></ol> The critical step is the fifth. As long as capital markets remain open, the company has other tools available. In May 2026, Strategy completed a $1.5B convertible note repurchase, reducing principal from $8.2B to $6.7B, while acknowledging in its disclosure that capital management tools include 'disciplined sale of bitcoin.' This indicates management is actively managing the capital structure rather than passively awaiting liquidation. <h2>Treasury Liquidation Risk Stress Test</h2> Using current data for a rough estimate of asset coverage at different BTC prices: <img src="https://static2.fansone.co/images/2616c511-d086-4492-89ef-2c7c7a5fef95.avif" />*Estimated as BTC Reserve + USD Reserve − Debt − Preferred The key takeaway is clear: real treasury liquidation pressure does not emerge when BTC falls to $50K or $40K, but rather when it stays below $25K for a prolonged period while capital markets close, USD Reserve is exhausted, and debt put windows converge. These conditions must occur simultaneously; we have not reached that stage yet. <h2>Signals Worth Monitoring Now</h2> Rather than fixating on a single BTC price, the following signals are more worth tracking:<img src="https://static2.fansone.co/images/2b840bf9-6e90-43cf-a623-85923a6f7dea.avif" /><h2>Summary Assessment</h2> The 'infinite accumulation flywheel' is unsustainable in the current environment; however, 'forced treasury liquidation' is not the near-term base case. Common stock mNAV at 0.6–0.7x indicates the flywheel logic has been impaired. Yet this does not mean BTC treasury liquidation is imminent. The more probable near-term path is: slowing or halting BTC purchases, using ATM to replenish USD Reserve, repurchasing discounted debt, tolerating higher preferred stock financing costs, and, if necessary, making small-scale BTC sales for liquidity. If BTC only falls to the $50K–$40K range, MSTR will mainly face valuation and financing pressure; if it drops to $30K–$25K and stays there for an extended period, the risk of a common stock death spiral will rise significantly. The zone that truly approaches a hard treasury liquidation crisis is closer to $10K or lower, and must be accompanied by capital market closure and liquidity exhaustion. ⚠️ This article represents only the author's personal technical research insights and does not constitute any investment advice. The cryptocurrency market carries high risk; please conduct independent evaluation and bear your own gains and losses.

MSTR Premium Extinguished: Will MicroStrategy Fall into a 'Death Spiral' and Treasury Liquidation Crisis?

<h2>What is NUPL?</h2> In addition to SOPR (Spent Output Profit Ratio), Bitcoin on-chain analysis has another classic indicator—NUPL (Net Unrealized Profit and Loss), which is also a commonly used tool for judging market sentiment and capturing cycle turning points.<img src="https://static2.fansone.co/images/7b3e2e43-49ee-43ad-a1b2-c7613c7af460.avif" /><blockquote>NUPL is calculated as: (Market Cap − Realized Cap) ÷ Market Cap.</blockquote> Here is a brief explanation of two terms: <ul><li>Market Cap: The market capitalization calculated by multiplying the current Bitcoin price by the circulating supply, representing the valuation the market is currently willing to assign to Bitcoin.</li></ul> <ul><li>Realized Cap: Not calculated using the current price, but by taking the price at the last time each unspent Bitcoin on-chain was moved, multiplying by the quantity, and summing them all up, representing the concept of the market’s “average cost basis.”</li></ul> Therefore, NUPL essentially answers one question: Compared to the market’s average holding cost, is the current market valuation showing large profits or large losses? <h2>How to Interpret the Values?</h2> Imagine that at this moment, everyone in the market simultaneously settles their coins at the current market price:

<h2>什麼是 NUPL？</h2> 比特幣鏈上分析除了 SOPR （Spent Output Profit Ratio，已花費產出利潤比）之外，還有另一個經典指標——NUPL（Net Unrealized Profit and Loss，淨未實現損益），同樣是判斷市場情緒、抓週期轉折點的常用工具。<img src="https://static2.fansone.co/images/7b3e2e43-49ee-43ad-a1b2-c7613c7af460.avif" /><blockquote>NUPL 的算法是：（市值 − 已實現市值）÷ 市值。</blockquote> 這裡先簡單解釋兩個名詞： <ul><li>市值（Market Cap）：用現在的比特幣價格乘上流通量算出來的市值，代表市場現在願意給比特幣的估值。</li></ul> <ul><li>已實現市值（Realized Cap）：不是用現在的價格算，而是把鏈上每一筆尚未被花費的比特幣 最後一次被移動時的價格， 乘上該筆數量後全部加總，代表全市場的「平均成本」的概念。</li></ul> 所以 NUPL 本質上在回答一個問題：現在市場的估值，跟全市場的平均持幣成本相比，是賺很多還是賠很多？ <h2>數值怎麼解讀？</h2> 假設現在這一刻，全市場所有人同時把手上的幣，用當下的市價結算： </p

Bitcoin On-Chain Analysis Basic Concepts - NUPL

What is NUPL?

How to Interpret the Values?

Creator other post

What is the Reverse Information Paradox? Can Bittensor and Gensyn Solve This Problem?

Emerging from the Bottom, But Not Yet Steady

Debasement Trade's Impact on Bitcoin #BTC

MSTR Premium Extinguished: Will MicroStrategy Fall into a 'Death Spiral' and Treasury Liquidation Crisis?

Random Post

Kumamoto Aso Attractions: Kusasenri Beach, Aso Crater One-Day Tour, Walking into the Vast Volcanic Grasslands and Healing Pasture Scenery!

Practice perspective....

Miaoli Shitan Food｜Must-Eat Fried Grass Jelly, Grass Jelly Sweet Potato Taro Ball Ice, Grass Jelly Soft Serve! Popular Grass Jelly Specialty Store on Route 3

Arousing Blowjob Techniques🤒🤒🤒