Cash.

@molesy39 neet and housecoin were fun but idk gang, nobody wants to bid and everybody wants to corner supply of newest shitter under 256k

@CashVerstappen trenches are dead except for neet

alon you hit the ultimate lick, best part is nobody can really be mad at you for it because alot of us ate off that once upon of time. but the trenches is dead, liquidity and socially. crypto topics especially memes get de-ranked in X algo now that's how bad it is.

Gave you $RIVN at local bottom but my name isn't serenity so I'll get no clout.

guy who is bullish on privacy, announces publicly, which privacy coins he is bullish on. hyperliquid

hilarious if ETH begins to outperform short term

remmebr when some dumbass said $ore cant trade higher because its connected to the price of $sol ? dumbass lol

@litigiouspeepop did not think he would sound like that

Stables are for horses

spinning back "Her Loss" and I don't remember it being this good on release.

@__t__i__p__ Trim RDW too, nothing in the market rn is moving from valuations, it's all speculation. Catch the wins, secure the gains and wait for sensible entries.

@CashVerstappen This rerating has been violent. I saw you TP on Wolf; RDW is up like 200% in 30ish days so do you trim to add back or just compound. Feels like things will top locally with the spacex IPO

trinity

bitcoin starts to show signs of maturing thus diminishing returns ct: "however the narrative of ai growth presents a grim path for crypto" stfu we just sent 40-year-old company to 1T in 6 months, masses chasing into green will always happen till the end of time. the one time it wasnt our turn mfs writting disortations on the state of satoshi's vision.

not that deep imo >we are barely 6 months since last ATH. >fuck tonne of ancient wallets sold into institutional bids rightfully so. >next 6 months BTC rolls over to 50ish k with macro putting a bump in AI trade, both bottom Q4 26/Q1 27 >halving Q1 2028, new ponzi/new tek catches bid and we do it all over again niggas trynna sound smart on fake WWW coins is why 7/10 CT participants missed out on greatest equity rally of 21st century

@frankdegods perhaps they forced btc into a bear before inflation ATHs to make this narrative real

the win condition for btc is clear: >hedge against inflation because central banks will always print more money this is the narrative that propelled bitcoin from 7k to 126k however the narrative of ai growth presents a grim path for crypto ai accelerates the path to quantum quantum poses a risk to digital money more acutely than it does to gold btc should not have to endure another cycle of flows where that is the ceiling concern the hedge against inflation needs to be a hedge against the future dangers of technology proof of work is poised perfectly to address this, as quantum & even the most advanced ai will not generate electricity the efforts to tackle this ambiguous future should start today & i believe if it did there would be renewed cult like excitement around btc and the entire asset class the writing is on the wall, the times are changing the sooner the better

@themarketradar its getting egregious at this point lol

I see where we are in the cycle and I understand what comes next

macro headwind + pending equity rollover shaping up beautifully ~50k on $BTC or whatever price is october 2026

cord going crazy rn on $MU

hard to imagine there was a time where FOMC, CPI, PCE, Rates, GDP and Employment data were pivotal to market direction.

trillion dollar company up 21% in a day because of a sell side upgrade. incredible tek.

op, and a few others ive seen, also incorrectly frames the value in the buybacks as market buys if i am reading correctly. the value starts and ends with mining, the buyback mechanic primary goal isnt to remove supply, its to reward minners. supply reduction if sol deploys are intense enough is just icing on the cake. earning real, consistent yield is why ore is so valuable esp in a world, on a chain where avg hold time is seconds and new tokens are endless. thats coming from a top 80 holder of uORE

@0xcarlosg @fafuflash Plan for v4 is to address many of the mechanics that give people initial pause and hesitation. Same mining process, just refined a bit.

I’ll be the first to admit I initially dismissed ORE because of its speculative, lottery-style mechanics. However, the current metrics are hard to ignore. ORE may be catching a "privacy" bid, but the real story is structural buy flows and how long they can continue. ORE’s mining game is simple: users deploy SOL across a 5x5 grid. Each round, one winning block is selected, and miners on that block receive the SOL deployed on losing blocks. Last week, miners deployed an average of ~$1.29M worth of SOL per day. 10% of SOL mining rewards are collected as protocol revenue and automatically used to buy back ORE from the open market. Of the ORE purchased, 90% is burned and 10% is distributed to stakers as yield. Over the past 30 days, ORE has spent ~$2.71M on buybacks, with activity trending higher over the past three weeks. That puts the token at roughly 2x P/S circulating, while current buyback activity implies a ~42% annualized yield on a $77M market cap (using current price and a 1-year forward projected supply of 572K ORE). Obviously, the game is highly reflexive and speculative. A higher ORE price makes mining more attractive, which can drive more activity, revenue, and buybacks. But if speculative demand fades, the incentive to mine weakens, revenue falls, buybacks decline, and the flywheel unwinds. How long this loop can continue is anyone’s guess, but at the current pace of buybacks, the near-term setup seems attractive.

@VitalikButerin @ethereumfndn @aerugoettinea I feel like we get one of these post from Vitamin every three months or so

Some of my perspective on where the @ethereumfndn is going. First of all, this is only my own view. The board is not just me, and I have no extra special powers on the board that the other board members do not. @aerugoettinea is the one executing much of this transition. My input has been largely on technical questions. The board is in the process of expanding, and my own power within the org will continue to decrease, which is honestly what I want. The 2025 era brought many important improvements to EF and its ability to execute. Many issues were resolved, and EF continues to benefit from its improved efficiency and greater focus on concrete goals to this day. And so with those problems resolved, early this year, the largest remaining hole that I perceived was something different nagging at me: I would regularly spot people saying things like "vitalik says these beautiful things about ethereum needing to be decentralized, and have privacy, and be a sanctuary technology, but why do the EF's actions not reflect that?" Now, you may have been hearing something different. You may not have been sensing a feeling of crisis at all, and maybe were hearing people saying that finally we were taking execution and BD seriously and the main task for us is to keep going that way and be even better and faster. Then probably there is genuine difference between you and me, in what kinds of criticism I take most seriously, and what kinds of critics through their criticism are most able to make me feel pain. As an analogy, let's briefly switch over to a different domain. One belief you can have about Google is that it is a success story, and has brought a lot of good to humanity in organizing the world's information. Another belief you can have about Google is that they had a beautiful idealistic beginning, but at some point the corruption of mainstream corporate attitudes seeped in, and they slowly bit by bit completely abandoned the "don't be evil" slogan. My belief on Google specifically is probably somewhere between the two. BUT, if you had taken me back in time to ~2008, and offered me a button to press to make Google one or two standard deviations more "dogmatic", eg. give Richard Stallman permanent veto power over some key policies, I would immediately press it. Why? Because a choice for one company is not a choice for the world, or even one country. Google existed and exists in the context of a technology industry generally drifting away from early idealistic don't-be-evil roots and toward greed for financial gain, totalizing visions of accelerated superintelligence, infiltration by sociopaths, and craven capitulation to (or worse, active participation in) government pressure for ideological control, surveillance and war. And so *one company* doing something different, positioning itself to be what George Bernard Shaw calls the Unreasonable Man, resisting the trend of the times, would have been better for freedom, balance of power and stability of society as a whole, than *all* large companies bending to dominant trends. This is a part of my version of pluralism. This line of thinking is not just mine, but I also is not too far off from what Aya and others had in mind with the Mandate. Now how does this all get to the role of the EF? EF is not a "center of Ethereum", rather EF is "one node, with a defined purpose, alongside other nodes". We've always said that the EF should be the latter, but many in the Ethereum ecosystem (and even within the EF) wanted us to be the former. Now, we are taking action to ensure that we will be the latter. This is particularly important because EF is a limited organization, with limited resources and limited organizational capacity. The EF has only ~0.16% of all ETH (less than many other individual ETH holders), whereas among other blockchains it's common for "the central foundation" to have 10-50%. Fiscally, the EF was originally designed to fulfill a limited work scope defined in the token sale docs and other pre-launch materials (building the chain software; getting through Frontier, Homestead, Metropolis, Serenity), which was fully completed in 2022; it was not designed to be an eternal steward. And so today, the EF is choosing to use its remaining resources to pursue longevity over breadth (yes, this means we sell less ETH). The EF focuses *specifically* on those activities critical to the success of ethereum as a censorship/capture-resistant, open, private and secure system, that would not happen otherwise. This means making hard choices, and in some cases even activities that we highly approve of and people that we highly respect becoming outside of the EF. People of great technical talent, public respect and even alignment with the mission and CROPS being outside of the EF is in fact necessary if we want important tasks to be able to attract outside capital. This also means the EF taking opinionated stands culturally. This is all intended in cooperation with all other parts of ethereum. We recognize that many other parts of the ethereum world highly respect CROPS and related values. But highly respecting is not the same as choosing to specialize and totally dedicate to a domain (Compare in a different domain: I think reducing animal cruelty is important, and I like vegan food, but am not full unconditional vegan myself) EF is still in a transition period, and we expect its new long-term form to stabilize over the next few months. What are the guiding principles of this new form? Again, I am only one person, but I can give my answer from a technical perspective (there are also critical non-technical aspects). At the core, *Ethereum must be impressive*. We are living in an age of highly intelligent AI and all kinds of other technological acceleration. "Status quo EVM, with a hard fork or two a year to optimize for short-term needs of users" is not interesting. To some, "impressive" means: 250ms latency and 1M TPS. I think Ethereum trying to go that route is a mistake. Being as fast and as scalable as possible, and only a small epsilon more decentralized than the others, is a route to mediocrity, and if we try it we will lose. I think Ethereum should scale. But I think Ethereum should strive the hardest to be deeply impressive in a different dimension: the CROPS dimension. This means things like: * Provably bug-free Ethereum. This is a goal that all cybersecurity researchers would have thought is absurd and impossible, up until roughly 6 months ago. Now, it's on the cusp of being possible, thanks to AI-assisted formal verification. So we should be frontrunners in doing this. * Available chain consensus. Ethereum is, and with lean consensus will cotninue to be, the ONLY chain that has both (i) traditional-BFT style properties that it's safe under asynchrony up to a high level of fault tolerance, and (ii) the bitcoin PoW-style property that under synchrony it's safe up to 49% attackers. As far as I can tell, literally no other chain has this or is planning for it; bitcoin goes for (ii) only and most other chains go for (i) only. Some will remember I fought hard for this, Unreasonably insisting that it is not OK for ethereum to rely on social consensus and hard forks to rescue ethereum from 34% of nodes going offline. It's OK for chains like hyperledger, bnb, solana, tempo, etc. It's not OK for bitcoin or ethereum or eg. zcash. * Intermediary minimization. The fact that smart contract wallets, protocols like railgun, etc have to send transactions through intermediaries to get included onchain is honestly embarrassing, and it's a constant point of fragility. Hence the work on FOCIL and EIP-8141 (and 7701 and years of work before) to make transaction sending intermediary-minimized with public mempool and strong inclusion properties, in a truly general-purpose way, that covers not just eg. secp256r1, but also privacy protocols and much more. Kohaku is pushing intermediary minimization at the user layer, pulling Ethereum away from the dystopian status quo world where our wallets don't even verify the chain, send our private data out to a dozen third-party servers, and toward a brighter CROPS future. Some of these goals are Unreasonable - maybe Ethereum would be "fine" getting only 50% of the way - what if we depend on intermediaries, but make it easy to switch? But going 50% of the way would not make Ethereum Deeply Impressive in the CROPS way. So we push for 100%. Fortunately all these goals are compatible with high TPS, this is a major focus of research (esp. on scaling the state). Well-designed L2s can also help, especially L2s optimized for specific applications (eg. high-volume trading, privacy...). These goals are even compatible with significantly lower slot times, thanks to Raul's work on erasure-coded P2P, and many other optimizations. The most high-value "product" of the ethereum blockchain, financially speaking, is ETH the asset. Ethereum secures $250 billion of ETH. The types of properties of Ethereum that I mentioned above are very good for ETH the asset. Nearly 90% of my net worth is in ETH, and most of the remainder is ~$40m of onchain fiat of which every dollar has already been allocated for some open-source biotech or software or hardware initiative. That said, there are aspects of supporting ETH the asset - *necessary* aspects even - that are outside the scope of the EF. This is where we need other heroes (some of whom hold more ETH than the EF does) to step in and help. EF has been recently thinking more about how it will relate to other such organizations, and give them needed initial support. EF will be a smaller ship than in previous years, a more opinionated one - in some cases more opinionated in ways that might be difficult to comprehend - but a longer-lasting one, and one suited to making sure that ethereum brings something meaningful to the world. We are grateful to all those inside and outside the EF who are helping to make this happen.