As we scale L1 after Glamsterdam to a 600M gas limit, there's a couple things to keep in mind about how it affects ETH, tokenomics, and how it's viewed by the world: 1. As L1 gas limits increase, the deflationary threshold decreases proportionally. For example, right now the L1 gas limit is at 60M and the deflationary threshold it 12.9 gwei. At a 300M gas limit the deflationary threshold becomes 2.58 gwei (12.9gwei*60M/300M). 2. As it becomes cheaper to use L1, that scaling creates potential/opportunity for new/different usecases which increases demand. For example, recent games where every action is onchain is a new possibility that will fill in 𝗹𝗼𝘄 cost blockspace. Unbanked usecases like subscriptions and payment streams such as access to games, blogs, licensing (music, shows, patents, trademarks), services (food delivery, hosting), rentals (physical goods), etc will consume 𝗺𝗲𝗱𝗶𝘂𝗺 cost blockspace. Complex compounded defi strategies and arbitrage will consume 𝗵𝗶𝗴𝗵 cost blockspace. All under one composable chain with no need for bridging. 3. As Ethereum scales and gas prices become lower, the willingness to pay a demand premium increases. For example, if normal gas prices are $0.01 a user will be much more willing to pay a 100% demand premium ($0.02) at times of higher congestion than they would pre-Glamsterdam ($1 -> $2). The lower prices get, the more price insensitive people become to congestion pricing. 4. These previous 3 points will lead to a substantial increase in burn rate, increasing scarcity and demand of ETH. Increased acceptance and usage of defi will further increase demand for ETH as a credibly neutral and permissionless collateral. 5. 30% of ETH supply is locked in staking to secure the network and the activity on top of it, further increasing scarcity and demand for ETH. 6. As Ethereum scales and the world comes onchain, this increased demand for ETH will secure it's place as a store of value and carry immense monetary premium, especially as it becomes the only quantum-proof chain and home for AI. See you at 6-digit ETH.

依然长期坚定看好ETH，不过不是盲目的“ETH maxi”，会基于理性，基于概率和赔率来判断。 ETH 有 L1 价值捕获/L2 流动性割裂、应用繁荣等两座大山要翻，但 AI agent经济体、稳定币支付、链上金融这些真实落地叙事一旦爆发，上限会远超想象。 支持以太坊不是看现在的价格，而是看 “去中心化 + 安全 + 无须信任” 的底层逻辑，这是它最大的护城河，目前为止也是远超其它加密项目的。 至于Vitalik、以太坊基金会、DAT 公司（如Bitmine ）、华尔街的影响方面，可以从多个角度看，不一定对，一家之言： 1. Vitalik（@VitalikButerin ）是一位很有远见的人，在加密领域的历史位置，仅次于中本聪。不过，在如今时代，他也面临“理想和实用”的拉扯。 Vitalik 是以太坊核心的灵魂人物，在2026 年重新强调无须信任、去中心化等加密核心价值，这是以太坊最具竞争力的部分，宁可发展慢些，不能丢。 他强调这一点，不为短期采用而妥协，值得赞赏。Pectra/Glamsterdam 升级、ZK-EVM等路线图都在往这个方向走，同时他也很关注 AI、隐私、L2 重构。 当然，在这一周期，在治理上，在L2发展上，也存在一些不足，导致这个周期被原来根本不是竞争对手的对手削弱，有些欠缺。 整体来说，Vitalik还是很清醒的，他没有让以太坊像其他公链一样为速度牺牲安全。 2. 以太坊基金会目前为止，很有必要，因为以太坊路线图还远没有到不需要任何人即可放手的阶段。 不过，其影响力是逐渐递减的。 
以太坊基金会是非营利组织，负责资助核心开发、研究和社区，其实做了很多实际的事情，包括也部分听从社区的建议，其中质押了大约接近7万个ETH，用收益来支撑后续的研发。 不过，kelp事故之后，它卖出ETH，让社区不少人不满，这也正常，在其他的DeFi 项目和创办人都在捐 ETH 救用户时，不仅没有推动解决方案，而且选择这个节骨眼售卖。 长期看，以太坊基金会的影响力会越来越小，这是健康的趋势。基金会持有的 ETH 比例持续下降（其实现在比例已经非常小了，仅从流动性角度，抛售对市场几乎没什么大的影响，现在的影响太多是社区情绪面的影响），意味着生态更去中心化（更多由 L2 团队、开发者、机构驱动）。 在以太坊路线图，比如抗量子/ZKVM等落地之前，EF都还是必要的，但不能是唯一守护者，真正的守护应该是以太坊协议本身的经济激励和社区。 3.DAT 公司（如 Bitmine） 这些是机构资本， 是这个周期出现的新玩家，带来实打实的需求。 截至 2026 年 4 月，Bitmine已经持有近 500 万 ETH（约占总供应 4.1%），目标是 5%，并通过自建的 MAVAN 验证者网络大量 staking，可产生年化几亿美元收益。 Bitmine 的好处是，它把传统华尔街的“公司 treasury 策略”（学 MicroStrategy囤BTC ）搬到 ETH 上，不只买币，还 staking、参与协议，强化了以太坊网络安全和流动性，利于让 ETH 从“投机资产”走向“生产性基础设施”。 4.最后是，华尔街的影响：双刃剑。 
华尔街现在把以太坊当成“金融后端”而不是单纯投机品。 其中， ETH Spot ETF 的流入，提供机构级入口和价格支撑；华尔街机构积极推进现实世界资产代币化，这些在以太坊链上运行，未来国债、房地产、私募股权上链，ETH 会锁定大量流动性。 在机构眼中，他们区分得很清楚——BTC 是价值存储，ETH 是可编程化结算层 + 稳定币 / AI 支付基础设施。 当然，也有不好的影响，比如中心化的压力，大机构 staking 可能影响去中心化等，还有监管变量等。 整体来说，华尔街的钱进来，带来的是真金白银的需求和合法性，利于ETH 翻过“L1 价值捕获”这座山。 5.两种力量的互补 Vitalik + 以太坊基金会代表以太坊的“cypherpunk 灵魂”（去中心化、长期主义），Bitmine 这类 DAT 公司 + 华尔街代表“机构资本现实主义”（规模、采用、收益）。 两股力量可以互补——前者让ETH 保持原汁原味；后者让它真正落地规模化。 未来 2-3 年，关键看 L2是否跟L1形成合力 + AI/稳定币/资产上链的落地。如果成功，ETH 会成为真正的「金融基础设施」；如果卡在碎片化或中心化风险上，就会被其他链分流。

> Sounds a lil bit anti-islam but hey Fuck statements like this. Similarly, fuck claiming that standing up for Gazans', West Bankers, Lebanese, Syrian people's right to live in peace and not get encroaching settlements, constant drone strikes and bombs is antisemitic. And fuck claiming that standing up for Ukrainian people's right to live in peace and not be invaded is Russophobic. And fuck not even noticing the needless and extreme manmade suffering in Sudan, Myanmar, North Korea and elsewhere. And fuck the possibility that in the future statements like this will have to include a line for Greenland. We stand for human dignity. That is the bottom line. You can disagree on details of individual situations and what specific actions hurt or help, but the bottom line in resolving such issues must be a common agreement that the underlying goal is to protect the dignity of all people. This is more important than political teams. There are also people who are on the same political team as you, but whose words and actions clearly demonstrate that they are not interested in human dignity - genuine *phobes who use appeals to freedom and life opportunistically. This must also be opposed. Again, the north star is human dignity. To be ultimately more interested not in pushing the people you oppose down, but in lifting the people you feel sympathy for up. If you observe the long-term pattern of how someone acts, you can tell.

I'm selling all my $ETHW tomorrow for another $ETH ETF...@bitwise @Matt_Hougan have been a bummer in promoting Ethereum and it's values. Especially when it was down just a few months ago. Now they're championing other coins, when they never even tried to champion ETH. I hold about about ~.5% of their fund. youtube.com/watch?v=H-mllGD6…

Solana’s future is dead. Since price is going up, manlets will call this cope. But can they debate my points ? 👇 ( forget Tom Lee, fight a third world peasant like me ) > Corpos are launching their own alt-L1s and not going for solana. What’s the use of solana ? > Corpos are launching their own Ethereum L2s and not going for solana. What’s the use of solana ? > Blackrock launched BUIDL on solana and after seed(20m), it received zero inflow. Like literally ZERO. NADA. Blackrock has finished their temperature check and not a single client of theirs trusts solana, while ethereum has received billions of inflows on BUIDL in the same period. > Solana has no slashing, so there no nothing at stake, zero economic security. > As solana price rise, their broken validator model fails due to voting fees. Becomes more centralised. ( in the last 2 years solana validator has fallen from 3000 to 1000. Centralisation is increasing. Alarming 🚑) > Solana has no client diversity and whatever they have is forced and controlled with foundation delegations. The client itself is the protocol. That’s why they will always have downtime. > Solana foundation has never ever revealed how much sol they own. In validator controlling delegations alone, they own 10 billion $ + worth sol. ( that’s 10% of the supply in delegations alone ). That’s why blackrock will never file for a solana ETF. They want their clients to be exit liquidity for solana insiders. Lord save the people who are still putting their hard earned money in this broken blockchain. Save your friends. Come to ETH. The ticker is ETH.

like or retweet this post if you didn’t turn bearish on Ethereum, ETH, and its developers and community at the bottom because you deeply understood that Ethereum is the future of global settlement and trust and you weren’t going let someone psyop you out of it

Based on current trends—ETH at ~$3,500, post-ETF inflows, and RSI consolidation—I predict it crosses $4,000 by mid-September 2025 and sustains for a week, driven by institutional demand and potential rate cuts. Risks include volatility; watch $3,300 support.

Fading Saylor, ETFs, and Treasury Cos didn’t work very well for BTC Appears to be the same result so far for ETH as SBET gears up to raise up to $5B more ETH’s biggest problem was that it wasn’t getting ETF + Saylor bid. As soon as that changed, so did the price action

There's another chance to address broken crypto tax treatment coming up in the form of an EO ordered report from the Treasury department.

There is no second best. We’ve sold BTC for ETH, giving us one of the largest ETH holdings among any publicly-traded company in the world. The simple truth is that ETH powers the most widely used blockchain in the world. Its utility, security, and scarcity are irrefutable.

Tom Lee (@fundstrat) explains why he is a raging Ethereum bull🐂

The tax code shouldn't punish Americans for using new technology. My bill fixes the broken rules around bitcoin and digital assets. MORE ⬇️  lummis.senate.gov/press-rele…

You gotta give it to Republicans, they don’t play fair, they play to win. They’ll rewrite the rules, drag out the clock, flip votes at gunpoint (figuratively), and call it patriotism. Meanwhile, Democrats are stuck performing moral theater for a crowd that left the show a decade ago. Here’s the brutal truth: Getting what you want in this world is a function of will, not decorum. And Republicans? They understand that. Democrats? Still clinging to a compass while the other side’s using a crowbar. It’s time to stop begging for fairness from people who eat fairness for breakfast. No more symbolic gestures. No more “holding the line” while losing the war. Play tough. Move fast. Hit back. Or stay losing.

$10k then $100k then $700k. The ticker is ETH.

33K by July (2026)

Most fascinating part of the CLARITY act in the House is the bright line decentralization test. Pass - token is a commodity ✅ Fail - token likely a security❌ According to chatgpt... BTC, ETH, LTC, XMR, Doge currently pass. XRP, BNB, SOL, Tron, Aptos, Sui currently fail.

For most of its life ETH had to pretend that it was blockspace, not money, in order to avoid war with the SEC When the SEC eased its stance on crypto, Solana and other L1s moved first, the shilling was blatant, untruthful and relentless, now the industry is pushing back ETH is now even more decentralized and battle tested and it has the best tokenomics, economic backdrop and market narrative ever It's time to stop being so humble and kind, it's time to push harder than ever before, it's time to accelerate, for years ETH has suffered the scorn of CT and now CT will suffer ETH eth/acc

100 ETH were assumed lost but could eventually be recovered. Here's what happened, how it became a happy ending and what's needed to prevent this from happening again. Context A user of Safe{Wallet} wanted to bridge 100 ETH from Mainnet to Base. But then they realized that they can't actually access the funds on the Base. The Safe on Base had a different set of signers than their original Safe, meaning they had no control over it. How can this happen? Unlike EOAs (Externally Owned Accounts), smart accounts like Safe are governed by deployed smart contract code. It's technically possible to deploy a smart account with the same deployment config (same signers) on different chains at the same address (using counterfactual deployment). So normally bridging to a chain where the smart account is not deployed yet is merely an annoyance as the user first has to deploy the smart account before they can access the bridged funds. But this case was different. The user used their @Safe smart account since 2020. The smart account version from back then (v1.1.1.) was not yet written with multichain in mind, so it was possible for anyone to deploy a smart account on a different chain with completely a different config at the same address. Something that has been changed since the v.1.2.0. version. Rescue Once the Safe team became aware of the incident, @tschubotz took immediate ownership. He examined the Safe on Base and noticed that the address had been deployed by an account that had preemptively deployed many other v1.1.1 Safes on Base. Through further onchain analysis, the trail led to @protofire. As it turns out, the Protofire team was aware of this edge case for older Safes and white-hat deployed Safes to frontrun a malicious hacker taking advantage of it. So just two hours after the incident was reported, there was hope that the funds could indeed be recovered. And few minutes later, a first test transaction and then a full transfer of the 100 ETH back to the user could be done. This is commendable anticipation of @protofire, strong leadership from @tschubotz and fantastic support by the wider @Safe team to get the funds safely back to the user. 💪 Learnings The root cause was the use of an older Safe version (v1.1.1), which didn’t account for multichain deployments. Since version v1.2.0, Safe includes protections that prevent conflicting deployments across chains by modifying how the CREATE2 salt is constructed. To bridge, the user chose the native bridge integration which is essentially a @lifiprotocol widget but with some optimizations for smart accounts. For example, the bridging feature warns users explicitly if there is NO code at the destination chain, meaning that no smart contract was deployed there. However, there was no warning in place for there being different code deployed on the destination chain. This additional layer of protection has now been introduced to cover the edge-case for old v.1.1.1. accounts. The deeper fix lies in improved keystore infrastructure (like keystore rollups) that can guarantee a consistent account config across chains. Until then, deployment behavior will remain difficult to reason about for developers and end-users. Finally, we are still at a point where users are expected to do test transactions before moving bigger funds. This is not scalable and shouldn't be expected from users. There needs to be more innovation around hooks, guards, and other safety mechanisms that allow strong protections for users. I'm glad this case could be resolved with a happy end and there is important learnings for wallet developers, especially ones using smart accounts. But it also clearly showed once again that a lot more work is ahead of us to truly make self-custody easy and secure for everyone.

the EF is reborn. Vitalik is locked in on research. Lubin is back, now on Wall Street. Etherealize on Wall Street, too, and in DC Ethereum haters are fucked

Strategic BET on ETH.