ETHEUR
Ethereum / Euro
crypto Composite

> Security is the product of the amount of ETH staked and the ETH price, and if all ETH is staked, security is 0 because ETH is worthless.
What? No, ETH would not be worthless if they were all staked, why would ETH be worthless?
Realistically they're not all going to be staked in any case though.

ray has to get worse before it gets better. ETH will only gain strongly after BTC leads.

Adding my 2 cents on the issuance proposal. I've been a solo staker since January 2021.
First, let's ignore decentralisation/centralisation issues, I will cover it in the 2nd part of my post. Arguments in favour of the issuance proposal:
* Ethereum should do what is in the best interest of *all* Ethereum users, and stakers are only one interest group. It is unquestionably preferable for non-stakers to have the lowest viable issuance so as to reduce the dilution of ETH held.
* Security is the product of the amount of ETH held and the ETH price, and if all ETH is staked, security is 0 because ETH is worthless. There should be a point where staking is actively penalised because it *reduces* security.
* The new issuance curve proposal promotes the use of ETH as the pristine asset in the Ethereum ecosystem (rather than staking derivatives from big staking groups).
* For the ecosystem as a whole, the net effect of reducing issuance is to move money from the taxman to Ethereum.
Now, on centralisation vs decentralisation: this is a complicated discussion, and I think it is objectively hard to predict the future. But I would wager that this would massively improve decentralisation.
* What is hard to deny is that the total amount of ETH held by centralised staking entities would go down under this proposal. This is by itself a very good thing. If all staking is held by one entity, then it is better that this stake is 20% of all ETH than that it is 80% of all ETH. This proposal reduces the risk that Ethereum can at some point be economically captured by any single entity.
* Now the question is how the *ratio* of centralised to solo stakers would evolve. Even here my best guess is that the ratio would improve (=go down). Why? 2 reasons:
* first, solo stakers are the cheapest operation in town. Yes, we do not have economies of scale on our hardware builds like centralised stakers do. But there are far bigger costs than hardware that we avoid completely: we do not have to pay out any salaries (including our own - no one solo stakes as their professional job), and we do not have to rent or buy any office space.
* Second, it is the very fact that issuance in ETH is so high that incentivises holders of ETH to stake to avoid dilution. And however accessible ETH staking becomes, it is foreseeable that centralised solutions will always be more accessible to casual holders of ETH.
In any case, this proposal appears so contentious that I can only see it passing if Vitalik weighs in. I hope for all of us that he does.

> With the new issuance curve this can go up to 99.99999% uptime resulting in loss.
With stake capping as proposed, the protocol brings net yield to 0% at 50% staked. What you are saying is, if we get arbitrarily close to 50% staked, then a validator with imperfect attestations will have negative yield. Yes, of course, if the network pays 0, you will have negative yields once you take into account imperfect attestation.
But the point of setting up a curve that reaches zero is precisely so that the staking yield equilibrium is found before. What would drive the market to demand 0% yield for staking? If the answer is MEV or other forms of exogenous yield build on top of Ethereum, then the actual yield of staking ETH is not 0 as you were assuming. Furthermore, there is intent to deal with MEV in other more targeted ways.
In practice the market will always request some premium for staking ETH vs holding it. Because staked ETH is locked and that illiquidity must be rewarded somehow. As we don't know before hand what that demand for yield is we must ensure that whatever equilibrium is found happens on a stake ratio range that is healthy. Stake ratios above 50% are bad for everyone:
- Holders: When stake keeps growing above 50%, holders get diluted more and more.
- Stakers: Staking income stops looking like actual income and progressively looks more and more like self-dilution.
- Protocol: ETH gets displaced as the pristine collateral by other forms of staking derivatives. Progressively most ETH is locked in the staking contract and the economy starts using staking derivatives. Furthermore these other forms of staking derivatives bring with them their own governance layer which starts to take over the protocol. And what is worst, slashing loses its meaning because most of the stakeholders are economically incentivized to break the rules of the protocol and fork away in such a case.
Capping stake at 50% fixes all those.

We've all watched someone turn a 10% loss into a full liquidation by waiting for it to bounce back. did it myself last year on an ETH long, kept moving my stop because the reclaim was "obviously" coming. it wasn't. account gone in one wick.
Realized later my mistake wasn't knowing what a stop was, but relying on manual exits. manual exits work fine until a flash crash prints while you're asleep.
What finally fixed it for me was two strict rules: set invalidation based on market structure before entering, and always use stop-market orders so you don't get skipped in a cascade. I trade perps on bydfi mostly, and i force myself to attach the stop-market right on the position tab the second the trade fills. if i tell myself "i'll set it in a minute," i know i'm cooked.
a stop you keep moving is the same as no stop. how do you guys handle stop discipline when a trade goes against you?

You are assuming that the market prices ETH both immediately and - more importantly - correctly enough for these effects to play out as described.
We've already seen that this isn't always the case. During periods of high fee burning, for example, the reduction in ETH issuance wasn't immediately reflected in the price, even though the long-term economics suggested it should have been.
The same thing is happening today. Staking APR is around 2.7%, which is already lower than many traditional investments. Yet the amount of staked ETH continues to grow. From a purely financial perspective, that doesn't make much sense unless participants are valuing ETH based on a higher expected future price rather than its current one.
This is why I think the proposal is flawed. It assumes the market will quickly converge to the "correct" equilibrium, but markets can stay mispriced for a long time. Large stakers have the capital, diversification, and lower operating costs to endure those periods while solo stakers don't.
With this proposal long periods of mispricing are much more likely to force solo stakers to exit, while large operators can simply absorb the temporary losses and wait for the market to catch up.

I agree, but when "staking" becomes swapping ETH for stETH/rETH or any other liquid-staking ERC20 wrapper, the friction almost completely disappears. If dapps start taking the wrappers as ETH-in-kind too then I can see the \~100% staking being a real risk.

I used to think buying crypto instantly with a debit/credit card was the easiest option... until I realized how much money was disappearing through hidden spreads and payment fees.
After comparing different methods, here's what stood out:
* Spot trading is usually much cheaper than using the "Instant Buy" button.
* Bank transfers often cost far less than credit cards.
* P2P marketplaces can be great if you're careful and only trade with verified merchants.
* Network withdrawal fees matter just as much as trading fees.
* Many "zero-fee" platforms still hide costs through wider spreads.
I also noticed that buying USDT first and then trading on the spot market can sometimes be more cost-effective than buying BTC or ETH directly.
I'm curious how everyone here approaches it.
**Questions:**
* What's your go-to method for buying crypto with the lowest fees?
* Do you mainly use Spot, P2P, or Instant Buy?
* Which exchange has consistently been the cheapest in your experience?
Looking forward to hearing real experiences rather than advertisements.

>nobody really gets a few years into investing and doesn't realise it's all about diversity
You'd be surprised...a lot of people are gamblers, not investors, and are left holding bags of BTC or ETH, only hoping to recoup their losses.

Many logical jumps required for me to agree with 50%.
- Assuming the proposed new issuance curve actually caps at 50%. There are more incentives than just yield to put your ETH in staking. One of them namely having a validator fleet that prioritizes blocks with your own transactions. This is more likely now than ever, see Bitmine.
- Assuming this is the only way to address the two issues I mentioned (UX and barrier of entry).
- Assuming no second order effects related to messing with issuance curve.

But then you should basically agree with the idea of stake capping at 50%.
That's exactly the point where we risk that most of the collateral is not ETH. By setting stake capping at 50% the protocol is setting the economic incentive such that most ETH is not locked staking. And therefore ETH remains the default money on the Ethereum ecosystem. If we allow staking to creep upwards of that, other derivatives on top of ETH (LST, restaking, etc...) will start to corner out ETH. And that bring its own set of new problems, the governance layer of those assets starts wagging the dog.

I understand your concern, in fact I was worried about exactly the same. My fear was that reductions of issuance would affect more negatively solo stakers than other forms of staking and we would push them out of the validator set. But as it turns out, if you do the math carefully this is true for very high stake ratios and implementing stake capping can serve to protect all forms of staking (specially solo staking).
With the current curve, the nominal yield floor is roughly 1.5%. That means that if the yield the market demands for staking vs holding ETH keeps going lower and starts getting close to those levels the stake ratio will keep climbing higher and higher. Nevertheless, with the current curve and using typical cost structure assumptions solo staking stops earning enough to compensate for issuance at around 60M ETH staked. That is, solo stakers will stop earning enough yield (after costs) to even beat the supply inflation of ETH. While other forms of staking with no fixed costs will remain viable until much much later (>100M ETH staked).
See here: https://imgur.com/vJl44mq
This causes a problem, there is a gigantic regime where solo staking is economically unviable while other forms of staking still are. If we get to those levels we will tend to push out solo stakers of the validator set. Which is bad for the network because solo stakers are the most uncorrelated set of staking participants.
Implementing a curve that enforces stake capping ensures we can keep the stake ratio below 50% where solo stakers are guaranteed to obtain positive real yields beating the supply inflation of ETH.
I would encourage you to have a read at this, it dates back to 2024 but explains some of these issues in detail and how stake capping deals with them: https://ethresear.ch/t/the-shape-of-issuance-curves-to-come/20405

The taxes are another great reason to do this. Governments are leaching off ETH at excessively high stake rates.

Regarding the issuance changes. One of the most commonly repeated ideas is that the proposed issuance curve will push out solo stakers in favor of large entities. In fact, the proposal intends to have exactly the opposite effect and enshrine solo staking as viable.
Here is how. When you approach high stake ratios most of the yield your receive is self-dilution, it's not actual income but a simple redenomination of the unit of account. Instead of being fresh cash flow it becomes more similar to a stock split. The problem is that staking still owes real expenses either in the form of hardware, electricity/internet and taxes. And the taxes are paid on nominal yields, not yields corrected for self-dilution.
If you do the math the unavoidable outcome is that for sufficiently high stake ratios solo stakers are always pushed out of the validator set. Always. Even if you were to remain staking irrationally because you just love your staking rig, you will still be pushed out because other forms of staking will earn higher real yields. So overtime they will come to dominate.
With the current issuance curve, at around 60M ETH staked, solo stakers will not be earning enough net yield to even make up for the inflation of the asset.
[Plot](https://imgur.com/vJl44mq)
The proposed curve does something very simple. Set up the issuance curve such that the entire range of risk premiums that the market may demand for staking is met between 0% staked and 50% staked. Such that the market can find an equilibrium whatever risk premium staking demands. And in doing so we can guarantee everyone (solo stakers included) can observe positive real yields staking.
If you think the proposal is about reducing yields you are looking at it wrong. That's not even possible to do, the yield is always defined externally by the market. The proposal is about ensuring net of costs and self-dilution staking can provide positive yields for all forms of staking. That's how we can keep solo stakers viable for the very long term.

Fresh start for the ETH engine

pretty sure price is what 99% of those invested in ETH care about.. just like everything else

Holding 10 ETH since years now. I am down 50%.

Ran out of btc. No worries. I paying a lower level thug in ETH to slap that person of yours that slapped my BTC contractor.

I don’t journal lol. I look at TradingView, map stuff out, and then buy or sell, lol. All I really look at are trend lines and moving averages. My average trade is about $20, and I’m doing at least eight a day. I use leverage a good bit.
I normally win around $3, but on at least 50% of my trades, I end up making only about half a buck. Average hold time? I don’t know, anywhere from one to eight hours, depending on the situation. Also, I trade crypto like BTC, ETH, and SOL, not meme coins, but they’re still volatile.

ETH Daily - August 4, 2026 📰
\-Tapered Issuance Burn proposal.
\-Arguments against issuance changes.
\-DeFi Saver Aave V3 to V4 migrator.
\-Devcon8 speaker application deadline.
\-Aztec Network Dark Forest game.
Read more: [https://ethdaily.io/the-ethereum-tapered-issuance-burn-debate](https://ethdaily.io/the-ethereum-tapered-issuance-burn-debate)