ETHEUR
Ethereum / Euro
cryptoComposite

>**Some quantum landmines,** >**Deep down the blockchain confines,** >**Read between the lines.** ~Daily haiku until we’re at least at 0.178 on the ETH/BTC ratio or highest market cap

It's absolutely a demand problem. ETH issuance is negligible compared to other coins.

The whole conversation the speaker himself while trying to sell this EIP keeps coming back to the same point, that is, that rate of issuance isn’t the problem, lack of uses for ETH is. The way I see it, until there is something more attractive to do with ETH staking is the only game in town.

I ran a backtest of plain HYPE/BTC/ETH/SOL spot long + perp short on Hyperliquid, both legs on HL, with real hourly funding and taker fees. Parameters were picked on JAN 2025 to Apr 2026. Always-on beat every funding-based on/off filter I tried: exiting on short-term funding dips just added fees and missed the rebound. Out-of-sample it came to about 7% a year on notional for the basket: HYPE around 10%, BTC/ETH 7%, SOL 4.6%. Basis noise stayed within a few bps. Funding on HYPE was negative only about 3% of days, compared with roughly 17% for SOL. As a sanity check I scanned the public HL leaderboard. About 28 large accounts, around $110M short in total, run exactly this trade on HYPE with a 1:1 hedge. The cleanest ones collected roughly 11.5–12% a year in funding over the last 90 days, so the backtest matches reality. Heads up: the leaderboard ROI for these accounts is meaningless, because it only counts the perp leg. Two other things stood out. HYPE funding roughly halved from 2025 to 2026 as the trade got crowded. And with portfolio margin, spot HYPE/BTC is collateral for the short, so the liquidation-from-split-collateral problem mentioned above mostly goes away if you stay on one venue. One thing I'm still unsure about: has anyone here actually run levered carry under HL portfolio margin, borrowing USDC against spot HYPE? I'd like to know how the borrow rate behaved when utilization spiked, and whether the margin ratio moved the way the docs describe during a sharp HYPE rally.

>He didn't elaborate that much. Yeah I wonder why... >I assume he means big companies will buy ethereum regardless of yield. But solo stakers are more sensitive to yield and will exit before big companies well. So small solo stakers are driven out and big corpo are buying ETH. How does that result in "more decentralization"?

Before he created Hex he podcasted about how he should create a scamcoin, then he created the flywheel that became Hex whereby people "donated" their ETH for him to dump and use to pump Hex. If newer victims didn't know about it I can't say or not, but he was very public before, during and after that he viewed it and deliberated on it as a scam but in his head if Ethereum isn't viewed as one then his shouldn't be either.

Thanks for the additional info. Definitely missed out on the discussion in the last 2 days. 200k contracts would be way more than the chainsecurity guys estimated. Maybe they missed some mechanism or could be that the effect on most of the contracts are minimal. If the transactions only reverts in a new way, that is not too bad, if it allows to enter into code that it was not supposed to get to, ever, then thats pretty bad. We will have to see in the coming weeks what comes out of it. There are some discussions in the ETH R&D discord on how to adapt EIP-8037 to fix some (all?) of the issues. There isn't too much discussion about it on their discord though. I would guess most of the core devs were at Devcon and probably now have some more in person meetings. I would therefore guess it will take some more time until the various teams can realign. I can imagine some of the following happening with increasing delay for Glamsterdam: - No changes to Glamsterdam. Projects need to fix their smart contracts. - Gas repricing gets changed. Needs more tests and probably a delay of some months. - The most problematic Gas repricings will get axed. Might impact gas limit scaling post Glamsterdam. No idea how much testing that needs - The whole upgrade gets overhauled. Don't think that is realistic, as most of the things are alright and do not touch anything gas repricing related.

Full debate on ETH issuance cuts ([pretty lively video](https://x.com/ethvaorg/status/2119101260951441557)) featuring . @jdetychey, @Pol_Lanski, @0xzak, and more. It's very lively discussion with supporters from both sides and genuinely undecided people asking thoughtful questions. A few things jumped out at me but **the whole video was very interesting**: * 14:12 -- Jerome is very frustrated/impassioned here. "When it reaches 50% it's over." (He means the whole Eth asset is over, not just the debate). * 31:40 -- Jerome: The main product of Ethereum is block space, and less and less people want it. On top of that we're lowering the price. We have low activity and the classic way to deal with this is to cut savings rate. * 34:07-- Jerome addressing BMNR employee: "Why don't you do something else other than staking? Why not do something cool like Blackrock just-in-time liquidity thing?" Someone at 35:00 made a really good argument roughly paraphrased: >Big companies like Blackrock will buy Eth as stocks/hedge for their clients. They get their management fee anyway, they don't care about decrease in yield. So that just results in more decentralization as solo stakers exit.

Decentralization also matters. I've been in this space for ten years. Do you realize how many "ETH killers" I've seen? Hype is going to do great... until it gets hacked/the chain halts/gets targeted for investigations or whatever black swan is next.

> Honestly, if as a dev your contract depended on fixed values of gas to work, then you either did a poor job, or you assumed Ethereum to be an ossified chain when it clearly is not and wont be in the near future. This is how I'd write contracts now but for example I remember after the DAO hack when people were just learning about reentrancy it was considered best practice to use `transfer()` so you don't send enough gas to do anything move the ETH and write a log entry. Solidity devs put this call in the contract for that reason and we were recommended to use it. It's been deprecated a long time people are still using the contracts I deployed from that era. Also IIUC these changes do things that aren't just shuffling constants around, for example `gasleft()` will no longer tell you how much gas you've got left (since glamsterdam complexified it and splits it into multiple budgets). It's one thing to know that the gas price of a particular call might change but it's another to anticipate how the chain might rewrite the entire concept of gas from underneath you.

I’m part of HoodFellas ($HOOD), a meme project on Robinhood Chain, and wanted to introduce the project and its game. The game centers on forming a family, running jobs, and competing with rival families. The crime-family theme also carries through our character artwork and community branding. The part I’d like people to look at is the game itself and how the family competition works, rather than just the token’s price. The top three winning families will share a total prize pool of $15,000 USD worth of ETH. That is the combined pool across all three families, not $15,000 for each family. The website is [https://hoodfellas.org/](https://hoodfellas.org/) and the game is accessible through the “Enter the Game” button. If you try it, I’d be interested in feedback on the family competition, the onboarding, and anything that could be clearer. For anyone checking the token, these are the project references: Network: Robinhood Chain Token: HoodFellas ($HOOD) Contract: 0x2932B2f5761cadCa5cB3e09D940092cA723D9EE2 Pool: HOOD/ETH on Uniswap v4 DEX Screener: [https://dexscreener.com/robinhood/0xd6a5bc05379b098c59fcc643bb17ce5bb1d8f3e2d417f5d00aa1bd98f88d4521](https://dexscreener.com/robinhood/0xd6a5bc05379b098c59fcc643bb17ce5bb1d8f3e2d417f5d00aa1bd98f88d4521) I’m posting from our project profile so the affiliation is clear. Questions and critical feedback are welcome.

Three weeks ago I posted that none of my 12 pre-registered BTC/ETH spot strategies survived costs and placebo tests. I got a lot of good replies, so here's the promised update. Still paper money only, still spot only, long only. No leverage, no borrowing, no derivatives (hard personal rule, not up for discussion). Short version: still nothing survives. But the testing got better, and I now know a lot better what I don't know. First, a correction In my first post I said I'm collecting liquidation data. That was wrong. I collect order book snapshots, cross-exchange lead-lag, news, scheduled events (FOMC etc.) and since Oct 19 also macro (DXY, US rates, S&P 500, Nasdaq 100, gold) hourly. No liquidations. Sorry to the people who replied on that basis. What I did 1. Replayed my live "sandbox" strategies on 7 years of history The paper bot runs 48 simple rules (breakouts, dips, momentum, RSI, Bollinger, hourly variants with filters). I replayed all of them on 2019–2026 with costs (0.10%/side + slippage), next-candle fills, and a placebo entry with the same exit profile. \- BTC/ETH: 0 of 64 strategy×market combos net positive. Best was "4h momentum, strong" at −0.12%/trade. Placebo was −0.25%/trade, so it is better than random, just not better than zero. \- SOL/XRP: 0 of 86 net positive. Best −0.07%/trade, placebo −0.26 / −0.28%. \- The hourly-candle rules: all 8 indistinguishable from their hourly placebo, all negative. So some rules beat a random entry, but none beat the costs. That pattern was the same on all four coins. 2. Maker fees don't save it Someone suggested limit orders. On my venue maker is 0.08% vs taker 0.10%, so the best case saving is 0.04% per round trip. My best rule is −0.12%/trade. Even with perfect maker fills it stays negative, and as several of you said, maker fills tend to come exactly when price moves against you. I dropped that route. 3. My "48 strategies" are not 48 bets I measured overlap. In the first week of live paper trading there were 1,806 sandbox entries but only 310 distinct market-hours. On average \~2.1–2.2 strategies per independent bet. The whole breakout family (1h/4h/12h/24h + 3 mixes) was 100% identical in entries. So my effective number of tests is much lower than 48, and one market move can tick a lot of boxes at once (same lesson as the 10/10 night). 4. Sequential futility testing The sandbox needs hundreds to thousands of trades per strategy before I can judge anything (deadline July 2027). To stop wasting time on hopeless rules, I pre-registered a futility check with an e-process (e-values, Bonferroni over strategies). It can only declare a rule hopeless earlier, never declare it proven earlier. 5. Plumbing problems I found in my own bot The paper bot's main loop sometimes lagged up to 2.4 s, giving \~800 latency errors in two weeks and about 9 signals rejected because data was too old. Fixed on Oct 28, now measuring before vs after. Lesson: paper trading measures your infrastructure too, not just your strategy. Where I'm stuck. These are the questions I'd really like deep answers on: 1. Multiple testing with heavily correlated strategies 48 rules, \~2 rules per independent bet, clusters that are 100% identical. Bonferroni over 48 is far too strict, over "families" feels hand-wavy. Would you use Romano-Wolf stepdown, White's Reality Check / Hansen's SPA, or estimate an effective number of tests from the overlap? And how do you combine that with sequential testing over time? 2. Defining an "independent episode" Trades overlap in time and across strategies. What's a defensible rule? Merge entries within X hours on the same market? Cluster by drawdown/recovery cycles? Something based on the autocorrelation of returns? I want to fix this before I see the next results, not after. 3. Power, honestly With 0.20% round-trip friction and the sample sizes I can reach by mid-2027, what effect size can I realistically detect? I'll compute a minimum detectable effect per rule, but if you've done this for short-horizon crypto: what's typical? I'd rather hear "your setup can never see an edge under X bps" now than in a year. 4. My last attempt (1 of 13 left) Most of you pointed the same way: forced flows, not price patterns. Liquidation cascades, index/fund rebalancing on known dates, funding resets. The most concrete idea from the thread: buy spot after a liquidation wave is over (open interest stops falling, funding normalizes), hold a fixed window, compare against random entries with the same hold time. \- How do you define "the wave is over" using only data up to t, without it quietly becoming "price stopped falling"? \- On spot only, does this survive 0.20% round trip at multi-day holds, or does it mostly exist on perps? \- Any documented retail-reachable flow with a known calendar (rebalances, unlocks, ETF flows) that you'd pick over liquidations? 5. Paper vs live I fill at the next price + slippage and assume full fills at €500 per trade. What did you see going live at small size on BTC/ETH: partial fills, queue position, latency? What would you add to a paper model before trusting it? What's running now Paper bot 24/7 on real OKX prices. 48 sandbox rules on BTC/ETH and 48 on SOL/XRP (always kept separate, never summed), each with a pre-set trade count and deadline. First evaluation moment is mid-December. Next update then, pass or fail. Thanks again. The replies in the last thread changed the test more than anything I read elsewhere.

If we all look in the mirror at midnight and say "Sunday Pump" 5 times then ETH will break above $2250. Don't let us down.

use a swapping service like thorswap/near and trade it for erc20 USDC and a bit of ETH for gas fees (if you need it). USDT has been banned in North American exchanges and replaced with USDC for at least a year now. You should be able to swap it right in metamask.

Feedback on my long-term crypto DCA strategy (BTC/ETH) + staking

Equally BTC, ETH, SOL, XRP, LINK, HYPE, ZEC, DOGE, TAO, NEAR.

Bitcoin is a store of value and has its place as the native currency of the internet. I own it but focus on alts that will be rails for the future of commerce (I think). So my bag is $ETH, $SOL, $TAO, $SUI, $VVV, $NEAR. Call me a shitcoiner but hey I like to experiment 🧪

>**An AI bungle,** >**Security stays humble,** >**Through the dark jungle.** ~Daily haiku until we’re at least at 0.178 on the ETH/BTC ratio or highest market cap

ETH became almost uninvestable with the advent of agentic ai. I really don't see the ecosystem surviving (much less growing and developing).

The downfall of David Hoffman will be studied. Man could have had it all but decided to go crazy. And I am not only talking about giving up ETH (after starting the triple point asset idea) but more his political path. Is that drugs or did he go crazy?

Solana better than ETH if I’m honest, but I’m not sure how they act as assets since their supply varies with usage

BTC, ETH, SOL, UNI, HYPE, and sprinkle in a couple AI or meme fun plays. The big thing being with alts, is taking profit and rolling it back into BTC to store

​I am writing this to place an official, urgent notice regarding the ongoing and active fraud investigation related to my P2P order 22805267579357126656 (amount: 12.93 ETH / \~€40,000). ​I want to make sure your higher team has the exact legal references and facts, because closing this case without a proper review protects a scammer who manipulated the system. Here are the concrete details of my case: ​Binance Order No: 22805267579357126656 ​Official Criminal Investigation File (Ankara Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office): Case No: 2025/226431 (Ankara Cumhuriyet Başsavcılığı - Bilişim Suçları Bürosu). ​The Core Fraud Evidence: The counterparty instructed me via the official Binance chat to send the funds to an alternate account (Payeer P1111560774 / MB Bank). I followed the instructions provided inside your chatbox and transferred the funds. Immediately after receiving the money, the seller claimed his account was "hacked." ​The Scammer's Own Contradiction: During the dispute, the seller himself uploaded screenshots/evidence proving that he had previously given the exact same Payeer ID to other traders. This completely shatters his "hacked account" excuse and proves premeditated, repeated fraud. ​Why I am reaching out now: Due to international bureaucracy and cross-border delays between Turkish authorities and foreign platforms, official digital paperwork through channels like Kodex takes time. However, a formal criminal investigation was officially opened under file number 2025/226431. ​Closing this dispute prematurely and allowing the scammer to walk away with 12.93 ETH based on a fake "hack" claim—while ignoring undeniable chat logs and transaction patterns—is completely unacceptable. ​I expect Binance's compliance and security team to re-examine this file thoroughly, review the seller's previous trade history and contradictions, and freeze/hold any further movement until justice is served. I have all bank slips, chat histories, and official prosecutor documents ready. ​Regards, Rafet Nasır (Binance User / Victim of P2P Fraud)

This post is about Altcoins. * **Even ETH (the largest and most prominent alt) is down over 50% in 5 years** * **BTC itself is only up 20% in 5 years** You also ignored everything I said about tax. Crypto has been an objectively terrible investment

Still keeping all your assets in one place or letting idle capital sit on the sidelines? Explore three ways to make your holdings work harder with KuCoin Earn. 1️⃣ **Hold to Earn** Deposit USDT, BTC, ETH, USDC, or SOL to share **50,000 USDT in rewards**, with zero lockups. 👉 [**Deposit to Earn**](https://www.kucoin.com/campaigns/Hold_to_Earn_Exclusive_Deposit_1103_02) 2️⃣ **Dual Investment** Put idle capital to work while waiting for the market to move. 👉 [**Explore Dual Investment**](https://www.kucoin.com/campaigns/Dual_4_1028) 3️⃣ **KCUSD Yield Boost** Deposit external USDT or USDC and earn up to an additional **3% APR** on KCUSD. 👉 [**Boost Your Yield**](https://www.kucoin.com/campaigns/Stablecoin_Yield_Boost) Make every asset count with KuCoin Earn!