Este tipo le pidió a Claude Opus 5.5 que transformara 2.500 años de civilización occidental en un solo vídeo. El resultado es completamente absurdo. Estamos hablando de un modelo de IA que prácticamente acaba de producir por sí solo un mini documental épico digno de un estudio entero.

Europeans really don’t understand what’s coming. Europe will be squeezed between US breathtaking tech innovation and China’s rapidly expanding manufacturing capacity and capabilities. Europeans keep debating and regulating, vanishing for August vacations while others pull ahead. Europe will become an open-air museum with really good cheese and wine.

The Cardano DeFi Ecosystem Audit is complete. 25 categories. Five scoring dimensions. Two reference ecosystems. It is the Phase 1 core deliverable of the @Cardano PRIME program, and it sets the baseline for everything that follows. Here is where Cardano stands.

Europe is heading into winter with high gas prices and the lowest storage in 15 years. Russia was never a reliable supplier. It used energy as a weapon in 2022 and still does. That is not energy security, it is irresponsible dependence. This year’s Middle East shock made it worse. Hormuz disruptions and the recent Saudi pipeline outage hit LNG and oil flows just as Europe competes with Asia for cargoes. The supposed “bridge” fuel is expensive and unreliable. Wind and solar do not run 24/7. When they drop, parallel gas-plant infrastructure is required, raising the true cost of renewables. They also strain the grid. Spain’s April 2025 blackout showed what happens when high solar output meets weak voltage control and saturated lines: plants trip, the system collapses, and people get stuck in elevators. Adding more renewable capacity without dispatchable backup and grid upgrades is not a smart strategy. Nuclear is the one source that delivers abundant, low-carbon power around the clock. Unfortunately ideology beat engineering and common sense, and Europe shut perfectly fine nuclear plants anyway. Now the grid needs more of the very fuel Europe is trying to escape. Energy is prosperity. Bad energy choices not only mean higher household bills. Unreliable, expensive energy has caused deindustrialisation, well-paid jobs have been lost, and a shrinking industrial base makes it harder for Europe to defend itself. Will Europe finally wake up, or will it still blindly follow left-green ideology?

PALM Community Update We’re aware of today’s sharp drop in PALM’s price and are actively investigating the situation together with our market maker and distribution partners to determine exactly what occurred. We can confirm that today’s price movement was not caused by the sale of any team-allocated PALM tokens. Team allocations remain subject to the existing vesting schedule. Our initial checks also indicate that team and project-related wallets remain secure. We are continuing to review the relevant activity and are treating this as a top priority. We don’t want to speculate or provide incomplete information while the investigation is ongoing. We will share further updates as soon as we have verified information and will provide a full report once we have confirmed the details. Thank you for your patience.

Not surprised to see this. It had to happen. Don’t mind them doing it… but they MUST abstain from voting if they take money for it. They can’t believe much in ADA either at this point, because they’re asking for hard USD. At least we know now what a DRep’s worth.

The NCL increase to 500M ADA will likely be approved today. This means that DReps will be busy again for the next few months approving withdrawals.

Cardano top spenders this year via the Davegov tool by @ItsDave_ADA governance.cardano-visualisa…

In the old days of Catalyst, teams were willing to build from grants ranging from tens to a few hundred thousand ADA. Many projects were delivered, including DeFi platforms, tools, bridges, etc. After launching on-chain governance, teams are surprised that a proposal asking for millions of ADA was not approved. It seems that devs are not willing to work under $200K per year. Some take it for granted that Treasury should cover not only development, but also marketing, operational costs, commercial expansion, etc. Teams offer no revenue sharing, or only very weak ones, like 4% of fees for 1 year after the project is launched. Teams protect themselves from a drop in the ADA price through a contingency budget, but I have not seen any proposal yet that would protect Treasury in case the ADA price rises from $0.25 to $1. It seems that teams are ready to accept salaries 3x higher than they were asking for. This has to change. And the only way to do that is to change governance. Treasury cannot bear all the risks without sharing the upside. The budget for Intersect has been approved. Now we need to start coordinating governance. DReps need to start talking to each other and agreeing on rules. DrepTalk seems like a place where this can happen. Check it out: dreptalk.com/ While this may be an unpopular opinion, maybe it’s time to seriously think about governance compensation. Processing over 100 governance proposals is a lot of work. Many DReps are exhausted. There was not a lot of interest in the CC-member role. Only a few DReps participated in the vote. About 150-200 DReps vote on withdrawals. Breaking the 200 voting DReps mark will become increasingly rare. DReps often vote impulsively on the last day before expiration. Without rationales. Social pressure is often the deciding factor. DReps decide on the allocation of hundreds of millions of ADA and the future of Cardano. I expect that whoever approves a $1M proposal will spend at least a day on the decision. I dare say that we have only one such DRep (it's not me). I expect that well-paid and neutral experts will be part of the decision-making process. A regular bank would charge about a 1-2% fee for processing a $1M loan. Then the loan would have to be repaid. In Cardano governance, teams don’t have to pay anything for processing. DReps will approve their withdrawal for free. The commercial team doesn’t even have to pay anything back. Projects like AdaLobby are emerging, where DReps get paid to provide feedback to teams. Why? Because teams don’t have a chance to get feedback from DReps. DReps simply don’t have time to respond to them, let alone provide them with quality feedback. Teams can only get feedback after submitting their proposals and only if DReps have written rationales. We implemented a system where a ₳10M budget can be approved without the team having to edit a single line in the proposal. DReps are even considered enemies of Cardano if they vote NO and demand changes. At the same time, the quality of proposals is often very low, with no evidence of claims, no cost breakdown, FTEs, etc. We have put Treasury in the hands of the community. The second necessary step is to ensure the quality of the decision-making process. I can imagine that 1-3% of the NCL will be allocated for governance to ensure coordination and compensation for experts and DReps.

Since all my stuff was across multiple posts. Here is any easy to digest summary, so everyone can make an educated decision and/or do some more research: BLOCKFROST: follow the money. Before you judge the 9.8M ADA ask, look at what the Cardano treasury has ALREADY paid Five Binaries, the company behind Blockfrost, in direct Catalyst grants: Fund4 .NET SDK ............ $8,300 Fund4 Ruby SDK ............ $7,000 Fund4 Kotlin SDK .......... $9,000 Fund4 Swift SDK ........... $9,500 Fund5 WebSocket link ...... $18,000 Fund7 Open-source backend . $119,000 Total: about $170,800. Every one completed. Every one community-funded. And that is before the separate Fund9 "Building on Blockfrost" challenge. In the Fund7 proposal, they told us in writing: "Blockfrost is already a successful project." And that after the funded year, "Five Binaries will take over to provide funds." The community believed them. The WebSocket vote alone passed 341M YES to 38M NO. THE TIMELINE 2020: Five Binaries launches Blockfrost. 2021 to 2022: treasury pays about $170k to build it out. Community votes YES, heavily. Jan 2024: IOG buys Blockfrost. Price: undisclosed. May 2026: IOG's first Blockfrost funding proposal fails. Jul 2026: it is back. Now 9,832,979 ADA to hand Blockfrost to "the community." So the community paid to build it, a private company bought it, and now the community is asked to buy it back. WATCH HOW CHARLES DESCRIBES IT, DEPENDING ON WHAT HE NEEDS THAT DAY Selling this proposal on video, reading out Binance, Coinbase, Kraken, Revolut: Blockfrost runs "the backbone of many of the off-chain activities in the network." Critical. Irreplaceable. Everyone depends on it. Defending IOG's commercial strategy in July 2026: he lists Blockfrost as part of the "commercial backbone" of Cardano, next to RealFi, Midnight and Pogun, the layer that "larger commercial integrations can be built" on. So which is it? If Blockfrost is critical public infrastructure, it belongs in the 62M ADA "maintenance" proposal IOG filed in the SAME round. Not a separate 9.8M ADA purchase. If Blockfrost is "commercial backbone," a business, then it should pay for itself. That is what commercial revenue is for. The treasury should not be buying it at all. He is calling it both. Pick one, and one of the two asks disappears. THE THINGS THAT DO NOT ADD UP The proposal says Blockfrost is "free since day one." Its own Terms of Service describe a paid, card-billed, recurring subscription. The proposal says all IP transfers "to the community." Nobody will name the entity that owns it today. The site said Five Binaries. After it was questioned in public, the footer switched to "(c) 2026 IOG Singapore Pte. Ltd." The operating company named in Blockfrost's Terms of Service and on its invoices is Five Binaries. Its 2024 and 2023 annual reports are filed and public. Its 2025 report was legally due on 30 June. It is still not filed. That is the one public document that would show what money actually runs through this operation. We are asked to approve 9.8M ADA without it. Make of the timing what you will. PLAINLY The community paid to build it (about $170k). A private company bought it (undisclosed sum). Now the community is asked to buy it back (9.8M ADA): for an asset nobody will name, with accounts nobody will show, sold as a "gift" by the people who would be paid to run it. Who is actually getting the better end of this deal?