1/6) Solana was DDoS attacked again yesterday This attack exploited fundamental design flaws which are considered features by SOL As it sacrifices decentralization & security for speed While ignoring the consequences of that trade off Specifically Proof of History & Turbine:

1/25) Solana has far too many red flags Blockchains should never have downtime Yet SOL has gone down at least 7 times since I first spoke out! A consequence of their own design decisions There are many examples of lies, fraud & bad design Exposing a pattern of bad behavior:

1/18) I do not support SOL, there are far too many red flags. Consistently displaying a pattern of bad behavior. Prioritizing attracting ignorant investors over good blockchain design. There are many examples of lies, fraud & bad design. I will go over several in this thread:

1/6) In early April 2020 the Solana team stated that the total circulating supply was 8.2M. When in reality the total circulating supply was above 20M! Marking the start of a long series of lies, fraud & deception by SOL The following story is all based on verifiable evidence:

1/17) Tether is a 118 billion dollar scam; bigger than FTX & Bernie Madoff combined! No proof of reserves & an audit has never been done; USDT is printing counterfeit money (fraud) Caught falsifying documents, obscuring identities & lying about reserves Stop using USDT now! 🧵

1/25) I do not support SOL, far too many red flags A blockchain with downtime is unacceptable ETH & BTC never go down SOL is suffering from the consequences of their own design decisions There are many examples of lies, fraud & bad design I will cover several in this thread:

1/25) Polygon is still highly insecure & centralized! It would only take 5 people to compromise over $2B Adding insult to injury 4 out of these 5 are the Polygon founders! This is one of the largest hacks just waiting to happen Reckless & irresponsible, a warning to the wise:

1/25) Ripple is centralized & permissioned, contrary to the claims made by its executives XRP is misleading investors by lying about its decentralization The foundation has total control over the network! Attracting retail buyers with such false claims is straight-up fraud! ⚠️

1/7) SOL has gone down again This is the 8th time SOL has gone down in the past year! Blockchains should never have down time, yet SOL goes down almost every month! This is another consequence of bad design As SOL prioritized attracting investors short-term over good design:

1/9) Elrond has solved the blockchain scaling trilemma! EGLD is now the first chain that has crossed the scaling finish line The holy trinity; state, execution & data sharding All fully interoperable, achieving ETH's roadmap before ETH! The future is now, the future is Elrond

BTC will collapse between 7 to 11 years from now! First, the mining industry will fall, as the security budget shrinks Then the network will be attacked (censorship & 51% attacks) Core will then have to increase inflation beyond 21M, splitting the chain & that will be the end!

Congratulations to the ADA community for implementing on-chain governance today! A critical milestone that most have not achieved yet As true decentralization at scale is impossible without governance Others pretend to be decentralized but are still controlled at the center!

1/14) Polygon in its current state is insecure & centralized! It would only take 5 people to compromise over $5B! 4 of those people are the founders of Poly! This is one of the largest hacks or exit scams just waiting to happen Reckless & irresponsible, a warning to the wise:

WARNING: BTC is vulnerable to a bank run! ⚠️ If a panic sets in; the vast majority of 33M on-chain users will not be able to exit The queue would in fact be 1.82 months long! Potentially even triggering a death spiral, annihilating investors; BTC's code & math do not lie: 🧵 All of these numbers can be independently verified, by looking at the BTC source code on your own full node! The Math: 🎓 The figure for on-chain BTC holders was taken from @glassnode's analysis on March 2023 The TPS calculation is based on Max Theoretical TPS: (Block size (1.66MB)/Transaction size (374B)) / Block time (10M) = TPS (7.75) We use the P2PKH TX format with 2 inputs & 2 outputs, to better represent an "average user" Even though Segwit allows for 4MB blocks this cannot all be filled with TXs, historically the largest BTC block filled with TXs was 1.66MB so we will use that number (1740636.16/374) / 600 = 7.75 TPS (rounding down to 7 as BTC cannot execute partial TXs) 7x60 (minutes) = 420x60 (hours) = 25200x24 (Days) = 604,800x30 (Months) = 18,144,000 (Monthly TXs) 33000000 (On-chain Users) / 18,144,000 (Monthly TXs) = 1.818 (months) The Reality: 💀 These are all extremely conservative estimates, as they assume zero network activity outside of these on-chain users exiting... It is important to understand that the BTC network cannot actually support month-long queues, it cannot even support week-long queues In reality, TXs would get stuck & eventually get dropped entirely (TXs drop after 3 days) Making it entirely impossible for smaller parties to exit, as only parties paying thousands of dollars for fees will get their TXs cleared in such a scenario (fee spike), such as large custodians & banks, as the capacity is finite, no matter how much people pay That is why self-custody over BTC is completely unsafe & we should be advising people against it! This will also only get worse as BTC surges in popularity, as most have no idea how deeply flawed BTC really is Death Spiral: 🌪 This type of panic would certainly also have a relationship with the price of BTC As a price drop would lead to a drop in the hash rate, as some miners would no longer be profitable, forcing them to shut down However, due to how the difficulty adjustment algorithm works; a 2-week readjustment period (measured in block time) A sudden drop in hash rate can severely affect the speed & capacity of the network, if half the miners left, for instance, block time would also drop in half & the readjustment period could take up to a month! Causing the queue to be over 3 months long, deepening the panic & causing the price to crash even more which in turn causes more miners to shut down, which would slow down the chain even more, causing the price to crash & even more miners shutting down, etc: a vicious cycle BTC's security budget is also unsustainable & will likely run out within the decade, something I have covered in far more depth elsewhere. This means that we have a definitive timeline, as a security budget crisis is very likely to trigger the death spiral scenario I have described here, that is if it does not happen before that L2s also offer zero solutions against this crisis from playing out, as "true BTC L2s" still require some form of interaction with the base layer in the form of an on-chain TX for self-custody Pure Greed: 🤑 There are literally ZERO use cases that can be supported by 7 TPS, making BTC by definition purely speculative. Unable to effect any real change in the world by virtue of it literally being useless For reference; FedWire & Chips on average do around 12 TPS (inter-bank settlement), PayPal does 200 (online payment), while VISA & Mastercard average at around 5k TPS (retail) All while BTC's crypto competitors can exceed 10k TPS, or even 500k TPS in some cases, all without sacrificing decentralization! There is no excuse anymore for keeping the limit this low, something I have covered extensively elsewhere Conclusion: Mass self-custody over BTC is a lie, even worse, it is a dangerous narrative to promote! The kinder narrative would be to warn people against self-custody on BTC, at least ETH got that right within their L2 paradigm (by promoting centralized solutions) The only way BTC can be adopted on mass is through centralized custodians & banks. So please do not pretend as if this is "freedom money". All that does is set more people up for absolute disaster when the inevitable collapse comes To make things even more tragic, this was never the original design, intent & vision for Bitcoin, it was hijacked along the way & completely perverted from its original goals I love Bitcoin & that is why we must speak out against the horrible monster BTC has become; the antithesis of all that Bitcoin used to stand for. As it was originally intended to be freedom money, "P2P Electronic Cash" as the Bitcoin Whitepaper so boldly stated! That is how far BTC has fallen Everything people project onto BTC is a lie, as BTC's tech & governance do not match their claims at all I will not tell you what alternative chains to adopt, as I am no shill, but I can with confidence warn people against BTC & if you insist on still investing in BTC do not self-custody! Personally & professionally as a crypto value investor, I would not touch BTC with a ten-foot pole, as it is clearly a toxic asset BTC is certainly doomed to collapse, as I see no viable path for change within the necessary timelines, there is, however, still much hope left on the horizon for cryptocurrency as a whole As Bitcoins original vision now thrives in its children instead! 🕊

1/6) The cryptocurrency top 50: BTC - The king is dead ETH - Long live the king USDT - Trusted without trust BNB - Wild West USDC - Trust Brian XRP - Decentralization LARP ADA - Academic-paced innovation DOGE - Started out as a joke; still a joke MATIC - Ignore the admin key

Ethereum is still not scaling; the narrative is false That is why Solana has 72x the usage (TPS) compared to ETH! Even when we include L2s (who keep most fees). SOL still has 7x the TPS than all L2s combined! Chase hype all you want, the reality that SOL is winning remains 🔥

Solana is broken; it fails to meet demand! Before leaving crypto, try other chains! Here are all L1s in the top 100 based on decentralization & scalability:🧵 BTC - Low capacity❌ BNB - Centralized❌ ETH - At capacity & centralized L2s❌ SOL - At capacity (parallelization)❌ XRP - Centralized❌ DOGE - Low capacity❌ TON - High capacity (sharding)✅ ADA - Low capacity❌ AVAX - Has capacity✅ BCH - High capacity (simple)✅ DOT - Has capacity✅ TRON - Has capacity✅ NEAR - High Capacity (sharding)✅ ICP - Has capacity✅ LTC - Low capacity❌ APT - High capacity (parallelization)✅ ETC - Low capacity❌ FIL - Has capacity✅ ATOM - Has capacity✅ XLM - Centralized❌ HBAR - Centralized❌ VET - Centralized❌ KAS - High capacity (simple DAG)✅ FTM - High capacity (DAG)✅ XMR - Has capacity✅ TIA - Low capacity❌ SUI - High capacity (parallelization)✅ ALGO - Centralized❌ SEI - High capacity (parallelization)✅ BSV - High capacity (simple)✅ EGLD - High capacity (sharding)✅ XEC - High capacity (simple)✅ QNT- Has capacity✅ WLD - Has capacity✅ NEO - Centralized❌ XTZ - High capacity (sharding)✅ EOS - High capacity (parallelization)✅ MINA - Low capacity❌ KAVA - Has capacity✅ IOTA - Centralized❌ KSC - Has capacity✅ A harsh truth distilled in a few words for each chain, as you either have the capacity or not To explain my methodology: Anything below 100 TPS is low capacity, anything above 1k TPS is high capacity. TPS is counted based on how many simple 1 to 1 TXs fit within a single block Any blockchain with permissioned elements is considered "centralized," deal with it! In brackets, I also highlight what scaling tech is being used, as the truth is that it is not possible to scale a blockchain without using some sort of exotic tech The exception is "simple" chains; without Turing complete smart contracts, no exotic scaling tech is required at all Sharding remains my favorite approach, as the upper limit can exceed 1M TPS! Parallelization has a lower total capacity but is significantly faster DAGs are theoretically infinitely scalable but come with other trade-offs, such as more difficulty in tracking a single global state Ultimately, we want cryptocurrency to succeed & it can only succeed if it is scalable. The recent failures in SOL are disappointing, which makes it all the more important to drive this message home hard Blockchains can scale to meet demand despite the recent growing pains!

1/25) MultiverseX (EGLD) is the technological holy grail of crypto Capable of exceeding 100k TPS now, as it has fully implemented sharding! After ETH & others gave up on this goal, EGLD came along & proved them all wrong! Come with me & explore the cutting edge of crypto: 🧵

Let's cut through the BS with hard facts: 🧵 ETH= 119 TPS with 50k+ nodes SOL= 10k+ TPS with 1.4k nodes ADA= 18 TPS with 2k nodes SUI= 10k+ TPS with 100 nodes NEAR= 100k+ TPS with 238 nodes APT= 10k+ TPS with 151 nodes ALGO= 10k+ TPS with 1.5k nodes EGLD= 100k+ TPS with 3k nodes (TPS = Capacity) (Nodes = Decentralization) Capacity/Decentralization = Scalability! This is all of course a gross oversimplification, as there are far more metrics to take into account & many more devils in the details. However, these are still incredibly important metrics on their own & should not be underestimated! Methodology: When it comes to the number of nodes I was specifically referring to native-delegated & solo validators (block producers). I did make an exception with Rocket Pool, EtherFi & others in ETH's case as these do achieve a form of trustless delegation equivalent to native delegation. I did however reduce these numbers significantly again to reflect the positive skew due to ETH having a maximum ETH limit per validator When it comes to TPS; I was specifically referring to the Max Theoretical Transaction Per Second for basic 1 to 1 value transfers I also rounded the TPS figures down to the extreme, SOL is really capable of 20k+ & EGLD of 200k+ for instance. But for simplicity's sake, I put them into general categories. So chains utilizing parallelization are in the 10k+ TPS range & chains utilizing sharding are in the 100K+ TPS range (this is assuming more shards can be deployed to meet demand in the latter case) For any chain that does not deploy advanced on-chain scaling techniques, I give an exact TPS figure, as there are hard limits that can be easily calculated like in ETH (gas limit) & ADA (block size limit) respectively My Picks, Deal With It: Instead of strictly following market capitalization as I usually do for such lists & following specific rules for inclusion. I just included whatever I wanted to... Because I will be accused of being a paid shill no matter what I do at this point while also facing extreme toxicity for telling everyone about these basic truths That is why I only included what I thought was interesting & whatever happened to fit within the X-character limit, as most people do not read the body of the text, only the start However, I did exclude modular chains & non-smart contract-capable chains if that makes you feel better. It is also highly likely that some of you will still think it is a grand conspiracy against your obscure chain because the tech is just so good... The tribalism, cope & delusion have become so ridiculous for some Honorable Mentions: I usually exclude ALGO from such lists due to the issue with its centralized relay nodes, but considering they are very close to fixing that issue, I thought I could make an exception here... As I decided to be less "strict" when making such lists. If you all hate this new approach let me know! Another important metric I excluded here was speed, as that is currently the big trade-off with the parallelized chains in the 10k+ range & the sharded chains in the 100k+ range (sharded chains are slower) You might also notice there is very little correlation between the number of nodes & TPS. That is because many aspects of the blockchain trilemma have been effectively solved & the trade-offs in the design space are focusing more on other metrics now. The economic & consensus design ends up having a far greater impact on node counts for instance, at least compared to the total capacity of these chains Conclusion: Shoutout to ETH for having the most nodes & EGLD for having the highest capacity! 🏆 I can also give your chain a shout in the comments by quoting the TPS & validator figures as a reply, if they are something to be proud of, I will be happy to help promote it! We should all strive to increase these figures & praise those who push the boundaries of innovation. The goal is to maximize freedom (decentralization) for as many people as possible (scalability) As cryptocurrency is useless without capacity & pointless without decentralization! 🔥

1/25) HEX is a scam! Technically not a Ponzi scheme but something much worse HEX is designed to enrich its founder through ponzinomics Unable to generate its own revenue, it purely relies on new investment to avoid collapse! Not all cryptocurrency innovation has been good:

BTC cannot support MASS self-custody: If everyone in the world did only one BTC TX, the queue would be over 37 years long! The math is undeniable: (Block size (1.66MB)/Transaction size (P2PKH) (374B)) / Block time (10M) = TPS (7.75). 8B (Users) / 217M (Yearly TXs) = 37 years!

Ethereum & Arbitrum fees peaked at $100 during the crash & BASE peaked at $50! 💀 Solana's median fee remained in the subcent range with fees peaking at $1 What is even more impressive is that SOL proccessed more TXs than ETH & all L2s COMBINED! 🔥 SOL is the future of finance

A list of the top 10 L2s by market cap; a dystopian nightmare of centralization:🧵 Arbitrum - Can steal all user funds instantly with a multi-sig, has permissioned proposers, centralized operator can exploit MEV & centralized sequencer can censor Base - Can steal all user funds instantly with a multi-sig, permissioned proposer can also steal all user funds, the centralized validator can freeze all funds, a centralized operator can exploit MEV & the centralized sequencer can censor Optimism - Can steal all user funds instantly with a multi-sig, the centralized operator can exploit MEV & centralized sequencer can censor Blast - Can steal all user funds instantly with a multi-sig, permissioned proposer can also steal all user funds, a centralized operator can exploit MEV, user funds can be frozen if insufficient liquidity on the bridge & the centralized sequencer can censor ZKsync Era - Can steal all user funds instantly with a multi-sig, permissioned proposer can also steal all user funds, a centralized operator can exploit MEV & centralized sequencer can censor Linea - Can steal all user funds instantly with a multi-sig, permissioned proposer can also steal all user funds, a centralized operator can exploit MEV, centralized sequencer can also censor & freeze user funds Mantle - Can steal all user funds instantly with a multi-sig, permissioned proposer can also steal all user funds, funds can be lost if external data becomes unavailable, the centralized validator can also freeze all funds, a centralized operator can exploit MEV, the centralized sequencer can also censor & freeze all user funds Scroll - Can steal all user funds instantly with a multi-sig, permissioned proposer can freeze all user funds, the centralized validator can also freeze all funds, a centralized operator can exploit MEV & the centralized sequencer can censor Starknet - Can steal all user funds instantly with a multi-sig, a centralized operator can exploit MEV, the centralized sequencer can censor & freeze user funds Manta Pacific - Can steal all user funds instantly with a multi-sig, permissioned proposer can also steal all user funds, the centralized validator can also freeze all user funds, user funds can also be lost if external data becomes unavailable, a centralized operator can exploit MEV, the centralized sequencer can censor & also freeze user funds The facts speak for themselves; this is disgusting!

Buyer beware; a list of major red flags in the cryptocurrency top 50: 3. USDT - No proof of reserves 5. XRP - Claims to be decentralized but is not 13. MATIC - Admin key can steal user funds 19. LINK - Admin key can manipulate oracle prices 31. HBAR - Claims to be decentralized but is not 40. OP - Admin key can steal user funds (L2) 41. ARB - Admin key can steal user funds (L2) 42. MNT - Admin key can steal user funds (L2) These are only the major red flags, like being able to directly steal user funds, ecosystem-wide systemic risks & false decentralization claims A full critique of the top 50 would be much longer If you disagree, bring it on; I have written extensive critiques on all of these projects Lies & corruption cannot stand against the light of truth; help me shine the spotlight on these pretenders to the throne!

What would you say if I told you the most technically advanced blockchain today; Is from a small team in Romania that raised $5M in 2019 Achieving what ETH gave up on & NEAR only recently achieved; full execution sharding! EGLD is that chain & it deserves more of our support!

1/20) Cardano has been propped up by false promises & claims Promising the moon while only delivering mediocrity ADA is one of the oldest 2nd generation blockchains Yet it is objectively the least capable compared to all of the competition I will cover why in this thread:

1/38) BTC's security model is broken It has to double in price every 4 years for a century or sustain extremely high fees! Just to maintain the present level of security... Which is impossible, as it would exceed global GDP within decades Therefore, BTC security is doomed! 🧵

1/16) SUI has a great design, except for its token economics: SUI claims to have a capped supply of 10B, with 52% being "unallocated" till 2030 The problem is that over 8B SUI is being staked right now! Over 84% of the staked supply is held by founders! SUI is centralized: 🧵

6/6) This is just one aspect of SOL's design that exposes the bad faith of its creation Prioritizing attracting ignorant cryptocurrency investors over good sustainable blockchain design There are many examples like this in terms of design as well as lies & fraud, buyer beware

1/25) Elrond is the closest to solving the blockchain scaling trilemma! The holy trinity; interoperable state, execution & data sharding However, there are also major flaws which I will expose in this thread Flaws that have to be overcome! Here are the pros & cons of EGLD:

1/45) Solana has far too many red flags SOL has gone down at least 9 times this year alone! A consequence of their own design decisions; sacrificing decentralization & security for speed There are many examples of lies, fraud & bad design Exposing a pattern of bad behavior:

Solana did hit 100K TPS this week due to a stress test on mainnet! Much respect for @DBCrypt0, but he is flat out wrong on this one, as his math is flawed! A standard TX (1 to 1) costs 450 CU, not 3k CU as DB claims... SOL's 100k TPS claim is legit! 🔥

Looks like Arbitrum went down for an hour yesterday At this stage, Solana is more reliable than ETH L2s! While everyone rallies around BASE, which had $10 fees today! That is what you get when you sacrifice the L1 on the altar of "L2 scaling"; unreliable & expensive custodians

1/8) The roadmap released by @VitalikButerin today proves that ETH will never scale There is, in fact, zero L1 scaling on the roadmap Everything is focused on L2s instead of empowering people to use the blockchain directly That is not cypherpunk at all

SUI's validators are colluding to CENSOR the hacker's TXs right now! Does that make SUI centralized? The short answer is YES; what matters more is why? The "founders" own the majority of supply & there are only 114 validators! Change only happens when we all understand the why

1/11) BTC is unique in that it is technically one of the worst cryptocurrencies It has a broken long-term security model It lacks capacity, programmability & composability With comparatively weak economic qualities BTC is, in fact, a purely speculative asset without utility

1/5) The cryptocurrency top 50: BTC - The king is dead ETH - Long live the king USDT - Trusted without trust BNB - Wild west USDC - Trust Brian XRP - Federation without purpose BUSD - Trust CZ DOGE - Started out as a joke; still a joke ADA - Academic-paced innovation

1/6) EGLD has completely solved the problem of MEV! (Miner Extractable Value) A problem that ETH research still spends countless hours of research & debate over All while this remains a non-issue in EGLD as they focus on more important things The solution is elegantly simple:

SOL is breaking new records today, with usage topping out at a whopping 1511 True TPS This is more than all other chains COMBINED! Even if we deduct for consensus TXs & failed TXs; (1511x0.85=1284): SOL still comes out on top Hate SOL all you want, but do not deny its success:

It is disappointing to see SOL go down today There is a correct balance to be struck between innovation & stability; this is not it I will investigate the cause of this outage in depth later However, if SOL goes down more than twice this year, I will drop my support entirely!

1/9) EGLD found the holy grail of blockchain technology Massive scalability while preserving decentralization! The first to solve the scaling trilemma with sharding, unlocking over 100k TPS of capacity now All other narratives distract us from that powerful & undeniable truth:

BNB, XRP, MATIC & BTC are not DeFi! The “De” stands for decentralization & “Fi” for finance BNB, XRP & MATIC are centralized due to their permissioned blockchain architecture BTC is just not capable of complex financial products ETH, ADA, DOT, AVAX, NEAR, EGLD & XTZ is DeFi!

1/9) SOL has the same economic model as ETH Yet many act as if it is dangerously flawed The only major difference to ETH is that it has high capacity & therefore lower fees All of this criticism around SOL's economics is nonsense; a 1.5% inflation rate is not a fatal flaw:

Crypto is absurd; The top 3 chains are nonsense, that is if we are honest with ourselves: BTC has no capacity, programmability & no long-term security, or scarcity! ETH also pivoted to reject utility, only to become a worse version of BTC... All while XRP remains centralized!

1/25) Solana has been marred in controversy since its founding With frequent downtime, failures, hacks & scandals! This is why I have put together a short & incomplete history of SOL's skeletons Working our way down a colorful history of lies, fraud & dangerous trade-offs:

Monero was successfully attacked; XMR is now insecure & centralized Qubic can rewrite XMR history, censor & double-spend! Turns out a $300M PoS chain can "take over" a $6B PoW chain! PoS is that much better The attacks will continue, foreshadowing BTC's fall; PoW is cooked: 🧵 The Full Story: It all started out in May as a way to optimize profit for the Qubit validators, as they were able to dedicate spare compute cycles to mine XMR on the side (2% of XMR hashrate) This ended up being so successful that Qubic formalized its decision by June to fully integrate XMR to help fund the Qubic ecosystem. This led to the Qubic mining pool growing rapidly (10% of XMR hashrate) It was at this point that Qubic started offering additional token incentives for its pool. Attracting more of the pre-existing XMR miners to join. As Qubic was now able to offer 3x the reward of standard XMR pools! Only after all of this did Qubic publicly announce its intention to "take over" the XMR network! By late July, the Qubic hash rate was approaching a majority share (38% XMR hashrate) according to Qubic Qubic itself was framing this as a "demonstration of power" rather than a malicious attack. Calling it a "tech demo" for decentralized AGI computing... There were DDoS attacks against Qubic starting on the 5th of August, which slowed down Qubic's hashpower accumulation. This counterattack was not enough; As on the 11th of August, the "selfish miner" attacks began, which allowed the Qubic mining pool to reach a "majority" share of hashpower by the 12th of August: To prove their control over the network, they claimed to do a 6-block re-org. While orphaning over 60 blocks in the process. Some researchers have disputed this claim. What we do know is that they gained a majority share of hashpower over a 100-block time period. This absolutely does allow Qubic to rewrite XMR's history, destroying XMR's assumed immutability, censorship resistance & trustworthiness over that time period This also allows Cubic to carry out double-spend attacks, which could potentially defraud people, protocols & institutions out of a lot of money. Which is exactly why most major exchanges have suspended withdrawals & deposits. Because they run the risk of getting ripped off by Qubic if they choose to exploit this vulnerability The fact that they merely could have carried out such an attack over that time period is bad enough As of today, the price has dropped significantly & the hashrate has also dropped over 30%... Demonstrating the viscous cycle of a failing PoW system Qubic is framing itself as an ally of XMR & claims it only wanted to make a point & does not intend to attack XMR again... That this point can even be made in the first place is exactly what is so damning: Lessons Learned: The fact that the token incentives for a $300M PoS chain are sufficient to take over a $6B PoW chain speaks louder than words, proving PoW's inherent inferiority! That is what makes this a unique sneak peek into BTC's future, too Applying the token economics of a smaller PoS chain to fund a "51% attack" on a larger PoW chain is not something I had thought of before. The incentive of free "marketing" might even be enough to pull that off at that scale. As I most likely never would have talked about Qubic otherwise, & look at all of the attention we are giving it now! All PoW-based chains are vulnerable to this type of attack, because their security budget is so abysmal compared to PoS based chains The introduction of political narrative also certainly muddies the water, where some might perceive the attacker as an ally instead. Further fracturing the defense effort... What also stands out is that XMR's security ratio (the ratio between market capitalization & security budget) is actually slightly better when compared to BTC: XMR = $55M (block reward) x 0.51 (attack threshold) = $28M (security budget) / $6B (market capitalization) = 0.5% (security ratio) (yearly) BTC: $19B x 0.51 = $9.7B / 2.2T (0.4%)! For reference & comparison, here is the security budget math for the top 3 PoS chains: ETH: 542B+0.97B+3.33B x 0.29 x 0.33 = $52.2B (10%) SOL: 101B+1.15B+5.26B x 0.68 x 0.33 = $24.1B (23%) ADA: 29B+0.01B+0.7B x 0.60 x 0.51 = 9.1B (31.3%) It is crazy how much better PoS security really is when compared to PoW. ETH, for example, has 5x the security budget of BTC at 1/4th the market capitalization, with a lower inflation rate to boot! Another interesting observation is that XMR actually does have tail inflation... Teaching us that even adding tail inflation to BTC when the crisis inevitably hits might also not be enough by itself to defend from an ongoing "51% attack"! This is all adding to the laundry list of competing interests, responses, factions & incentives at play during a "51% attack" on a PoW chain. We can at least draw the conclusion that when this all finally plays out on BTC that it will be even messier & ever more chaotic than we first thought Bad Enough: This was technically not a "51% attack" as the total stake was much lower, somewhere between 28% too 38% depending on whose numbers you believe. While also not fitting the "attack" part of "51% attack", as they did not steal from or censor anyone. This can be seen as more of a "demonstration" There is conflicting information on the claimed 6-block re-org, as some researcher are reporting that their nodes did not see it. This is also not the type of thing you can look up on a normal explorer, either, as most explorers will only display the "canonical" history. Cyber Capital research was not running a Monero node at that time, either, so I will throw my hands up on this one until more information comes out to clarify this contradiction in evidence However, Qubic was able to get to over 51% of block production over a period of 100 blocks by leveraging "selfish mining" techniques. This is even confirmed by Qubics' critics. That is, as far as I am concerned, bad enough by itself & represents another type of attack. Gaining control without acting on that newfound power does not negate the control... That is why I am mostly uninterested in attempting to minimize the gravity of this event by debating overly nuanced technical details. As that quickly becomes another way for us to stick our heads in the sand Who is Next: The Qubic community has just voted to target Dogecoin next! This same playbook can be applied to chains mined with ASIC's as the majority of the hashrate came from "bribing" pre-existing miners using Qubic token incentives So that means an attack on DOGE & maybe even LTC (merged mining) is potentially on the table for Qubic. We should not expect a public announcement of intent until they are much closer to gaining a majority share, as that is what they did with XMR Ofcourse, this playbook is not limited to Qubic, so we might end up seeing other chains follow their example by taking over other smaller PoW chains Solution: The majority of the XMR community is not going to like my solution: Proof of Stake The writing is on the wall: PoS is objectively more secure, more decentralized, more fair & more economically sound There is no good reason not to embrace this new technological reality: Evolve or die Conclusion: Out of all of the PoW chains, this could have happened too; XMR is the least deserving of being attacked XMR is a staunch community of cypherpunks & privacy advocates. Whose heart, for the most part, is definitely in the right place, as they are actively fighting for all of our freedoms, especially our right to privacy! ❤️ That is why I hope they come out of this stronger; adopting PoS will most certainly achieve that. The greatest expression of anti-fragility is to accept radical change when under extreme pressure; As that is how diamonds are formed! 💎

1/6) In early April 2020, the Solana team stated that the total circulating supply was 8.2M When in reality the total circulating supply was above 20M! Marking the start of a long series of lies, fraud & deception by SOL The following story is all based on verifiable evidence:

1/41) BTC is fools gold It has a broken long-term security model It lacks capacity, programmability & composability With comparatively weak token economics I abandoned BTC by 2017 Yet I still believe in Bitcoins original vision, which I first fell in love with back in 2013:

I am sorry for anyone who has lost capital due to FTX Keep in mind that cryptocurrency is not fundamentally affected Blocks continue to be created like clockwork This reminds us that: Trust in centralized authorities is exactly the problem blockchains were invented to solve!

Ethereum is in deep trouble UNI moving off-chain is only the final nail in the coffin, all apps are moving to competing L1s & L2s instead Collapsing ETH revenue, UNI was ETH's biggest fee-paying customer! Now ETH is being left behind, irrelevant & broken; Ethereum is cooked 🧵 What did we expect would happen after pushing all usage to competing chains ("L2 scaling") A cucked course of action from the perspective of ETH Betraying ETH's cypherpunk dream for the sake of L2 VC funding, as the ultrasound money meme has now been thoroughly defeated by "L2 scaling" It is as clear as day from the moment Dank Sharding was implemented, as you can see in the chart below: It shows that when users move off the L1 significantly fewer fees end up on the L1, decreasing the burn rate. This should have been obvious from the start. This usage & resulting revenue is now getting captured by rent-seeking L2s instead! That is what makes it parasitic, as only a fraction of the fees ends up back in the L1, while for-profit companies get to keep the rest. All while these same parties lobby to keep ETH's L1 block space constrained This chart released by @Unchained_pod even shows how for every dollar paid to the L1 OP gets to keep 300 dollars! If that is not extractive, I do not know what is: EIP-4844 only accelerated that process, by giving L2s a cheap place to put their data while entirely ignoring L1 users, that is why UNI is forced to move elsewhere: The fact that a swap cost over $30 on ETH now is completely unacceptable, as well as a $60 NFTs sale fee, what is this clown world? 🤡 It is all effectively a giant middle finger to the incredible achievements of ETH DeFi, as they break up the kingdom into smaller parts for the sake of selfish profit. High fees kill utility & innovation every single time: UNI should move as far as possible away from ETH as possible as far as I am concerned The UNI L2 will have its own validator set anyway, so it will be entirely possible for them to pivot to becoming an L1 in their own right in the future, or they will deploy the uni app natively on an alternative chain eventually The only reason left to deploy on ETH is the security, however, security is based on revenue in the long run. This is why ETH is on a steady path to nowhere with its current roadmap, as L2s are sucking all of the life out of it Bait & Switch: We all noticed it, we are not stupid, just like we also noticed it for BTC, as the light of truth exposes all of the corruption As instead of a "global computer"; a single composable state where all DeFi could interoperate; ETH is now a fragmented ecosystem of centralized service providers... The complete opposite of what ETH was supposed to become, to make it even worse: Remember ETH 2.0? Scaling the L1 through execution sharding; That has now been successfully implemented on NEAR & EGLD with more soon to come. All while purely parallelized chains make a decent case for not even needing to implement sharding & still keeping up with massive demand! As the technology has advanced so far we can even say that we have solved the classical blockchain trilemma in practice, making all of the compromises inherent in ETH's "L2 scaling" entirely unnecessary All while the ETH core developers claim that scaling the L1 while preserving decentralization is "impossible", an unbearable state of affairs Conclusion: Ethereum is effectively bankrupt, not just intellectually & ethically but also economically Still riding on the laurels of its past success, most cannot see the writing on the wall At this point, Ethereum deserves to lose, as it has been doing over the last year, losing ground to its technologically far superior competitors. The success of UNI is no longer correlated with the success of ETH The numbers do not lie, ETH has made itself irrelevant & it will continue to decline as it continues down this self-destructive path. The future now belongs to the countless alternatives that are open for business now!

Beware of centralization disguised as "crypto"! ⚠️ In the top 100 by market cap, there are 11 chains that are totally permissioned! (centralized): BNB, XRP, XLM, HBAR, MNT, POL, VET, ARB, OP, STX & STRK Crypto's value is based on decentralization; so, reject the pretenders! 🔥

1/9) Ethereum is dying while L2's dance on its grave ETH cannot sustain high fee revenue because it lacks the capacity At the same time, L2s are seeing record highs in usage & fees while they lobby to keep ETH's capacity down! That is what makes it a parasitic relationship: 🧵

XRP is extremely centralized; Permissioned, low validator count, high node requirements & no stakeholder governance! It is centralized in every single way you can imagine It is criminal that they claim to be more decentralized than BTC & ETH; XRP is an investment fraud/scam!

Arbitrum, Optimism, Base, Blast, Starknet & ZkSync all have admin keys! All of the top L2s can steal all user funds right now If this is considered safe, then we might as well go back to legacy banking ETH gives decentralization lip service, but actions speak louder than words

1/25) The two biggest offenders for "fake" TPS metrics are SOL & ADA: SOL is misleading investors by a factor of 6.5, while ADA does so by a factor of 26.5! Both are guilty of ignoring industry standards for TPS Time to break down the numbers & separate truth from fiction: 🧵

Arbitrum, Optimism, Base, ZkSync & DyDx all have admin keys These are the top 5 L2s & they can all steal user funds right now If this is considered safe, then we might as well go back to legacy banking ETH gives decentralization lip service, but actions speak louder than words

Blaming SOL for the fraud & scams that occur there is a brain-dead take; This always happens to permissionless chains that rise to a dominant position 🔥 In 2014, it was BTC scams & criminal markets. In 2017 ETH ICOs & in 2021 it was ETH NFTs! SOL is the BTC & ETH of 2025: 🧵 Scammers & criminals will always seek out the cutting-edge, as it is on this frontier where they can extract the most, just like the Wild West of old Does that make the frontier bad? Ofcourse not, in the same way, that BTC & ETH were not bad during their heydays A truly decentralized, permissionless & public blockchain cannot block criminals, scams & fraud... That is the trade-off we make for freedom, truly making it the home of the brave; if you cannot stomach that, go back to centralized products! The early internet was much the same, with a much higher proportion of criminal activity, scams & fraud that we see today. Over time, with mainstream adoption, this was watered down & consumer protections were improved. Making the internet a much more respectable place today compared to when it was in its infancy Most also do not realize that pornography drove a lot of the internet's growth, specifically the acceleration of innovation around capacity, speed & more: I have never endorsed memecoins & I likely never will as a research-led fundamental value investor However, the analogy to pornography & the early internet is uncanny, even if it is often distasteful. I am not in the business of denying reality; I am in the business of uncovering & discovering reality A major difference to the internet is that crypto is not a single protocol, but thousands all competing over dominance & adoption. This free market dynamic is powerful & even though it drives a lot of evil in our world, the net effect is still positive. Free market competition drives innovation & exerts "evolutionary pressure". This, however, does mean we are cycling through dominant chains over time. First, it was BTC, then it was ETH & now it is SOL! I value freedom & am willing to accept a certain degree of chaos & danger in return The truth is that SOL is now leading the cryptocurrency movement, whether we like it or not! The high frequency of scams & fraud are only additional signs of this dominance, along with the undeniable usage metrics, where SOL is clearly leading SOL's leadership has also been relatively responsible, as they have been putting their audience's attention & focus on real projects, for which there are plenty on SOL. As a matter of fact, the application revenue for SOL is now higher than all other chains combined! (5.8M in the last 24H!) Again, I have never endorsed meme coins & never will. However, one of the reasons for PumpFun's success has exactly been because it is more fair than most of the alternatives out there. The platform itself guarantees that there is no pre-sale & no team allocation; this is why some of the biggest meme coin scams were not launched on PumpFun! We all need to inject a bit more nuance & detail into these conversations; nothing is ever clearly black or white, good or evil: I also suspect that the recent meme coin mania was driven by the sorry state of our industry. a lot of people perceive meme coins as a less rigged game compared to the VC-infested waters of "mainstream" crypto. Where the majority of the supply is now often controlled by insiders... We should bring ICOs back at scale now that the regulatory environment can support that again. Since at least that gave retail the same opportunity as the VCs participating at a ground level Either way, blaming SOL for this recent mania is completely misguided; if anything, we should be thankful that somebody was able to pick the ball back up after ETH fumbled it. We should care about the adoption of decentralized blockchain infrastructure; I am not so petty as to oppose this adoption surge by totally opposing SOL There is plenty to criticize SOL for, but supporting fraud, scams & fraud is not it. That is a tired argument that I have countered for over 12 years now, both in defense of BTC, ETH & now SOL in turn. Do not be like the sour BTC maxis of 2017, denying reality as their usage metrics are flipped by ETH. Constantly moving the goalposts of success until they became a pet rock Realism & an adherence to empirical evidence inform our position, love or hate SOL. You cannot deny its prominence; this is why Trump launched on SOL; no other chain had the infrastructure to support that sort of scale overnight Based on crypto's history, there is a good chance that there will be a different dominant blockchain, in a few years from now. That blockchain will also most likely host the majority of fraud, scams & criminality. This has always been the case & most likely always will SOL is no angel, but it is also certainly not a devil ☯️

SOL has 56x the capacity & 30x the speed of ETH now! Taking both roadmaps at face value, this gap is only widening over time By 2026, SOL will have 298x the capacity & 80x the speed of ETH! There is nothing in ETH's roadmap that catches up to SOL in any way, shape, or form 🔥

1/5) I have softened up on SOL over time The network effects are undeniable, even after taking inflated metrics into account Stability has improved by fixing the very issues I pointed out years ago Since ETH pivoted away from L1 scaling; SOL has become a strong opposing voice:

BTC has become a joke; I can barely take it seriously from a tech perspective It has an outdated & broken design While being hopelessly unequipped to improve due to its own politics & governance Yet it tops out in market cap; this is why I will keep warning you of its downfall

Base CAN instantly steal ALL user funds! The SC admin key is controlled by a "security council"/multi-sig! If these are "extensions of Ethereum," then ETH is centralized & insecure now So, disappointing to watch Vitalik make blatantly false statements:

Solana is destined to become the most decentralized blockchain! Decentralization ultimately comes from fees, without scalability; Ethereum loses the game SOL price only needs to double to surpass ETH's security budget! As no one has a monopoly on decentralization & security 🧵 Relative to market capitalization, we can even argue that SOL is more decentralized now: ETH's Nakamoto Coefficient is 2! SOL's Nakamoto Coefficient is 19! (Nakamoto Coefficient measures the number of parties that need to collude for an attack) This is a direct consequence of ETH's decision not to implement native delegation, resulting in a single provider (Lido) dominating staking instead! We can also compare the total number of validators; in the case of ETH, these figures are often extremely misleading. ETH supporters often fall into the bad habit of counting multiples of 32 ETH instead of the physical machines involved in block production! Here are the real numbers: ETH has 8.8k validators SOL has 1.1k validators (Counting ETH consensus clients using "Ethernodes" as the source. For SOL, we count validators using "Solana Beach" as the source) ETH has a clear lead here; however, this is all while ETH has a market cap that is five times that of SOL! As the number of validators absolutely does scale with the value of the network. ETH still wins in this particular metric, but this is not a meaningful difference As I mentioned in the opening, SOL only needs to double in price for it to exceed ETH's security budget What is interesting about this is that this is even possible at a fifth of ETH's market capitalization. As that makes SOL significantly more efficient in terms of security. This is primarily due to SOL having a higher staking participation rate, which is more due to circumstance than any particular design feature: ETH has a security budget of $50.5B SOL has a security budget of $25.3B Here is the security budget math: ETH 524B+0.97B+3.33B x 0.29 x 0.33 = $50.5B SOL 107B+0.70B+5.26B x 0.68 x 0.33 = $25.3B (Market capitalization + fees + inflation / staking participation rate / attack threshold) The most commonly ignored decentralization metric is governance; this is where SOL wins. ETH has thoroughly rejected the idea of on-chain stakeholder governance, whereas SOL is continuing down the path of true decentralization. Even if SOL's on-chain governance is still relatively basic & incomplete, the social contract has at least been established. Whereas the opposite of that is now true for ETH: ETH has centralized governance! SOL has decentralized governance! We have covered four decentralization metrics so far & the score is 2-2. It is up to you to decide what metrics you prioritize over others There are also more decentralization metrics that I did not include here, but I would consider these to be the most important, excluding permissioned & centralized design features, which fortunatly neither ETH nor SOL have, so it was not relevant to include here In absolute technical terms, ETH is more decentralized at present. I will go even further & say that ETH is technically the most decentralized blockchain. Even if SOL is more decentralized, politically speaking However, projecting that out into the future, I am confident that SOL will eventually overtake ETH in all decentralization metrics The primary reason for this assessment is the difference in the two underlying scaling roadmaps. That is because, compared to SOL, ETH is not scaling its L1 meaningfully at all! How L1 scaling impacts decentralization: The more the L1 scales, the higher the node requirements become; however, the more the L1 scales, the more useful it also becomes This usefulness or utility, which comes from scale, brings with it massive economic benefits in the form of fees Fees are what will ultimately pay for the majority of security, scarcity & decentralization we expect from blockchain technology This means that the ideal blockchain design must strike a balance between these two levers. Thereby, in the process, maximizing both decentralization & utility. Because going too far in either extreme is detrimental to both, due to positive & negative feedback loops This is how ETH is hurting decentralization in the name of decentralization, a tragic irony... The "ETH perspective" represents an overly simplistic understanding of decentralization, where they think low node requirements = decentralization When you reason in a vacuum as an engineer, this is true. It is, however, absolutely false when you place a blockchain into the real world & account for economics, incentives, & politics When in reality, by temporarily taking off your engineer's hat & putting on the hat of a social scientist & economist. It becomes abundantly clear that SOL, over the long term, is taking a more decentralized approach. By not sacrificing utility on the altar of decentralization & losing both in the process A good blockchain designer understands there is a middle way Conclusion Is SOL perfect? Absolutely not; however, it is still significantly better than ETH in the long run in every single way, including decentralization & utility! The classic blockchain trilemma is outdated due to advances in scaling tech; we have now far exceeded it, as Vitalik also originally predicted when he first coined the term It is a shame that Vitalik now holds the opposite point of view, which is partially why ETH chose the "L2 scaling" path, an uncompetitive solution when L2s take the majority of fees. Allowing SOL to eventually overtake ETH's security budget! That is how ETH exceeded the decentralization of BTC, so that is also how SOL will exceed the decentralization metrics of ETH in the near future SOL already has a lion's share of all crypto revenue, as the security budget funding ratio between inflation & revenue flips, so will the combined security budget of SOL flip that of ETH! SOL's relative price to ETH doubling will also do the job of making SOL the new leader in security & eventually also decentralization SOL already has way more capacity, while being cheaper & faster. Because of this, it will also be the most decentralized & secure in the long run When the security budget finally flips, all non-scalable chains will have no legs left to stand on! 🦕☄️

BTC is a dead end Lighting adoption is a pipe dream, with a UX only usable with custodians Spending hundreds of terawatts on a speculative asset & spinning it as environmentally friendly is delusional at best No capacity means no utility & without utility; there is no security

Solana is failing right now The rate of dropped TXs has degraded SOL's UX to an unacceptable state Victory laps by modular scaling advocates are premature, though, as this will be fixed within weeks SOL will return to reliably hosting more TPS than ETH & all L2s combined soon!

1/36) BTC's security model is broken It has to double in price every 4 years for a century or sustain extremely high fees! Just to maintain the present level of security... Which is impossible, as it exceeds global GDP within 31 years Therefore, BTC security is doomed!🧵

1/7) Nobody is doing what Solana is doing; talk is cheap SOL stayed up during an unprecedented meme coin rush last week There was severe congestion, that was bad. However, meeting that demand is still impressive As no other chain in the top 10 is even remotely capable of that!

Satoshi Nakamoto was a big blocker! This contradicts maxi narratives, as it exposes the capture & resulting pivot of BTC The truth is that Satoshi would oppose everything that BTC stands for today! As the facts of history expose BTC for abandoning its own founding principles:

Ethereum is finished; Solana has now overtaken ETH in application revenue! All while ETHs core devs pontificate on 5+ year timelines at Devcon Far removed from reality, focused on their petty L2s, building infrastructure for infrastructure... The future is now & it is not ETH!

1/11) Kaspa lacks key features that are critical for L1 blockchains KAS has no Turing-complete smart contracts or PoS! Chains without these two features are uncompetitive, no matter how scalable they are KAS claims to be technologically advanced, yet it fails to measure up:

1/15) BTC is a purely speculative meme-coin with ZERO utility ETH is also totally uncompetitive; as they sold their soul for L2 tokens & equity! XRP is centralized & they are deceiving the public So what is left? Plenty! Let's explore some options together with impartially: 🧵

The real bitcoiners left BTC by 2017 What BTC became had nothing to do with the original intent, vision, or purpose BTC has, in fact, totally abandoned Satoshi's vision; it was meant to be P2P Cash, not a pet rock! That is why real bitcoiners support BTC's competitors instead!

Algorand deserves our praise ALGO is decentralizing by adding a P2P gossip network, as this can replace the permissioned relay nodes! Reserving judgment until I see the specs, as devils might still be hiding in the details Nonetheless, it is a huge step in the right direction!

It has been great visiting SOL's Breakpoint conference this week Exciting to learn about all of the new developments, especially Firedancer! I have high hopes that it will be able to achieve massive scalability As it is breaking new ground in terms of single-shard performance

BTC is based on lies & perpetuated by greed As it is not useful, scarce, or secure in the long run... People are being sold a fantastical vision of BTC that is untrue... This mass collective delusion has pushed the BTC meme coin into the trillions; this can only end in tragedy

BTC - Play & pretend magic internet money ETH - Hates users but loves L2 funding USDT - The biggest Ponzi scheme of the century! BNB - Looks & feels like crypto, but is not crypto SOL - Crypto hates SOL, but SOL loves its users USDC - Trust Brian! XRP - Pretend decentralization TON - Crypto red flags with messenger app adoption DOGE - The joke that keeps giving TRX - The successful older brother nobody talks about ADA - Still at an academic pace of innovation AVAX - We are all secretly Emin fanboys SHIB - This joke is getting old DOT - What ETH now wants to be! BCH - The real Bitcoin nobody acknowledges LINK - Trust me bro LEO - Why does this still exist in 2024? DAI - Please never change... MATIC - One admin key away from a full rug pull! LTC - No longer just BTC x4 NEAR - When sharding? KAS - Scalability without programmability UNI - Righteously facilitating scams since 2018 ICP - Using misleading terms since 2021 PEPE - Trolling humanity since forever APT - Prioritizing VC returns as the new normal XMR - The cypherpunks that put BTC maxis to shame ETC - The fork that keeps failing XLM - Even better at pretending to be decentralized STX - This is for pretending that BTC has DeFi SUI - Why not keep half the supply for yourself?

6/6) The total circulating supply was now 16M, double the supply promised in April! After this they just moved on, Not even publishing this release on any of their official announcement channels. This is just one example of a pattern of behavior exposing SOL's bad character.

1/9) Stop saying that sharding is too hard or impossible When several cryptocurrencies have succeeded in implementing this technology today Solving the scaling trilemma by achieving massive scale while preserving decentralization Let me explain; using EGLD as a living example:

I do not support SOL; far too many red flags: SOLs founders were caught lying about supply & made false statements about TPS SOL falsely inflates usage by design & its ecosystem was complicit in faking peak TVL numbers Any blockchain with downtime is also utterly unacceptable!

Everybody loves to hate Solana Not for what it is, but for what it was & represented; update your damm thesis! SOL is a different beast now, so stop with the BS criticisms & recognize SOL for what it has become We should praise SOL for carrying the L1 scaling torch of freedom!

The top 50 blockchains by market cap rated on scalability (1), governance (2), decentralization (3) & token distribution (4): 1. 2. 3. 4. BTC: ❌❌✅✅ ETH: ❌❌✅✅ BNB: ❌❌❌✅ SOL: ✅❌✅✅ XRP: ✅❌❌❌ TON: ✅❌✅❌ DOGE: ❌❌✅✅ ADA: ❌❌✅✅ AVAX: ✅❌✅✅ TRX: ✅❌✅❌ DOT: ❌✅✅✅ BCH: ✅❌✅✅ LTC: ❌❌✅✅ ICP: ✅✅✅❌ ETC: ❌❌✅✅ HBAR: ✅❌❌✅ APTOS:✅✅✅❌ ATOM: ❌✅✅✅ FIL: ❌❌✅✅ XLM: ✅❌❌❌ KAS: ✅❌✅✅ VET: ✅❌❌✅ XMR: ❌❌✅✅ SUI: ✅✅✅❌ Before unfollowing me out of sheer rage! Let me explain these metrics first: Scalability: Any chain that can exceed 1k TPS of "theoretical max capacity" gets a check mark. This is calculated by taking the smallest basic TX type & dividing that by the current capacity (block size/gas limit). I also accounted for "fake" TXs, such as consensus messaging in the case of SOL. I did not count parachains/subchains or L2s. As I am strictly measuring the capacity of the L1 here, as I remain skeptical of modular designs. Governance: Any chain that has fully implemented on-chain governance gets a check mark; plans & half-implemented systems do not count! For the sake of fairness, out of the chains that failed this check, three are still seriously pursuing on-chain governance right now, these are: SOL, ADA & AVAX Decentralization: This is far too complex to measure so simply, so in this case, I went with the lowest possible bar; permissionlessness. This gives us a binary for every blockchain. Though this is definitely a gross under simplification, which I can at least acknowledge here, it does mean that some of the chains we define as "decentralized" are often far from that in practice. Though this is sufficient for a simplistic analysis, a more granular approach would take multiple decentralization metrics into account instead. Token Distribution: Went with another simple metric here; any chain that has less than 50% of the supply owned/controlled by the founders gets a pass! There is some grey area here, as distributions can start out bad but become more distributed over time. Determining exactly when it crosses that 50% mark can be hard through chain analysis, especially if it sits right on that border. Conclusion: Nothing is perfect or unique; as you can see from this list, not a single chain passed all of the checks or stood on its own in a single category. This definitely makes some of the quasi-religious tribalism in this space all the more insane. That is why I take a pluralist approach by never exclusively aligning myself to a single blockchain ecosystem. That way, we are better able to maintain our objectivity & steer away from biases. As you will undoubtedly see in the comments, this will upset a lot of people. But as I hope some of the more reasonable people can also see; I am setting up objective measures & comparing these blockchains fairly according to those objective measures. If your favorite chain does not get a checkmark, it is not my fault; blame the chain, not the science or the person behind it! For the rest of you, I hope this was informative & I also hope your favorite chain will eventually pass all of these checks; for your sake, freedom's sake & humanity's sake!

1/6) The good, the bad and the ugly of cryptocurrency: The ugly; Matic's & Arbitrum's admin keys can steal all user funds! A total value of over $2B! Chainlink's admin keys allow for the manipulation of its price oracles, which are used across DeFi Putting over $40B at risk!

I love SUI's tech, but the token distribution is garbage You are making it worse by doubling down on some terrible takes "Unallocated" allocations, seriously? It comes across as defensive & insincere; clean up your communication, please; this is bad:

1/7) The SUI Foundation responded! Turns out all of SUI's "unallocated" supply has been allocated... "Every token that will be released has been allocated" Now, who is really being dishonest here? 84% of SUI stake is still controlled by "founders"! 🧵

1/25) Algorand's technology is cutting edge Highly scalable without sharding or L2s, boasting a TPS of up to 6k with 4-second finalization times & on-chain governance! Unfortunately, ALGO is also centralized & permissioned: Permissioned gatekeepers can censor any TX on a whim!

Do not use ETH L2s! As they are all insecure, centralized & dangerous, ETH's "L2 scaling" roadmap has failed ETH is now a platform for building centralized services... Using scalable L1s such as SOL, SUI, or NEAR today is WAY more decentralized & secure compared to any L2! 🔥

There are some harsh truths in the top 50: 🧵 BTC & ETH have centralized governance & do not scale USDT, BNB, USDC & XRP are permissioned SOL & TON lied about the circulating supply ADA & LINK still have centralized "upgrade" keys DOGE, SHIB & PEPE are collective delusions AVAX cannot decide between modular & monolithic scaling DOT & ATOM's inflation rate is far too high TRX is disrespected by the wider crypto community & yet is the leader in remittances BCH was right, but the community is still too small NEAR is far from near a full sharding implementation MATIC can still steal user funds due to admin keys UNI front-end censors TXs based on sanctions LTC is mostly a BTC clone with some parameters x4 ICP's marketing is misleading DAI & MKR's endgame plan is ruining its prospects ETC cannot justify its existence APT & SUI have horrible supply distributions HBAR, XLM & VET are also totally permissioned ARB & OP are positioned to profit from ETH's demise KAS lacks Turing complete smart contracts MNT is the reddest top L2 on L2beat FIL became an L1 without figuring out L1 scaling first IMX crypto gaming still makes zero sense beyond serving as a casino AR makes promises it cannot keep (indefinite storage time) GRT is the least sexiest use case in all of crypto OKB is just another centralized exchange token STX relies on a federated model as truly native smart contract functionality is impossible on BTC XMR will likely forever remain a niche TAO's use case makes zero sense, as it is extremely inefficient, capitalizing on AI hype WIF & BONK are the latest generation of collective delusion, this time powered by Solana FTM is migrating its entire chain for a mere 2k TPS in total capacity; good but not amazing LIDO is a centralizing force in ETH, in part as a consequence of the lack of native delegation built into ETH's L1 Conclusion: Nothing is perfect. I even support some of these. Do not let perfect be the enemy of good. At the same time, if you cannot handle the critique, look within instead of lashing out. Not to say that I am not open to criticism myself, but in most cases, the rage is fueled by internal biases & conflicts. As every chain has room for improvement, without acknowledging the flaws, you can never improve. This is true for individuals as well as cryptocurrencies. On a more positive note, I also did a thread last week covering the positives in the top 50, so check that out for a nice counterpoint. Even though we still have a lot of improvements to make & narratives to correct, there is still constant progress as we gradually march forward into a brighter future.

SOL went down many times last year, in part due to a lack of fee markets That was one of the reasons why I was a SOL critic This year, SOL implemented local fee markets & it has been stable all year! It would be irrational to stick to my critique; that is why I support SOL now

Using SOL is faster, cheaper, easier & more decentralized compared to an ETH L2 Seriously what is ETH even doing? No wonder SOL keeps winning! That is why SOL has more TPS than ETH & all L2s combined today! ETH is too far behind & it cannot catch up socially or technologically

The SUI network went down today! A consequence of innovating on the cutting-edge What SUI has done is still far more impressive than any dinosaur chain's uptime! 🦕☄️🌊 Cryptocurrencies should never go down Early development has always been a painful exception to that rule...

1/9) BTC has to double in value every four years for the next century or sustain extremely high fees Just to maintain the current level of security Such growth is impossible since it would exceed global GDP in 31 years based on current price Therefore; BTC security is doomed!

Solana has an excellent economic design With a long-term inflation rate of 1.5% combined with a 50% burn rate of the base fee It is perfect, as tail inflation ensures long-term sustainability while the burn allows for scarcity The fear-mongering around SOL's economics is FUD! Some people are acting as if SOL is the next LUNA... A ludicrous assertion, bordering on hysteria, considering that SOL has a conventional economic design... An initial "bootstrap" phase in terms of inflation is normal; that is how BTC, ETH & almost all other blockchains have worked in the past. High inflation that steadily decreases over time. It is, in fact, a textbook example of what good token economics should look like, as SOL also replicates the innovation first introduced with ETH's EIP-1559. That is why SOL essentially has the same economic design as ETH. The only significant difference is that SOL is scalable, whereas ETH is not. According to my thesis, over the longer run, a scalable chain with low fees will be able to gather way more fee revenue anyway. There were the shenanigans with the early circulating supply, which I acknowledged & covered. However, that is still completely irrelevant to a discussion of SOL's current token economic design. The token distribution is also not abnormal; in terms of upcoming unlocks, SOL is actually in a much better position compared to the latest generation of parallelized competitors, such as APT, SUI, and SEI, for example. These chains all have far bigger upcoming unlocks, and distributions are skewed far more towards insiders compared to SOL. So, the extreme narrative against SOL does not at all match the current reality. Solana has become a market leader, & I cannot help but think some people cannot accept that, forcing them to come up with fictitious narratives to justify their continued rejection of SOL. I am partially to blame for that, as I personally spearheaded a lot of those criticisms. However, I was also able to change my mind when SOL changed & reformed. Therefore, you should also change your mind, as there is nothing strange or abnormal about SOL's economics today. Quite the opposite; SOL has an ideal economic design, & if you do not recognize that you are sticking your head in the sand!

SOL now far exceeds ETH's daily DEX & perp volume, revenue, active addresses & TPS! This is what "L2 scaling" looks like for ETH; being overtaken by SOL is the price it pays A sign of ETH's failure as much as of SOL's success ETH's lack of capacity is now its Achilles' heel!

BTC, XRP, BNB & XLM are not DeFi! The “De” stands for decentralization & “Fi” for finance BNB, XRP & XLM are centralized due to their permissioned blockchain architecture BTC is just not capable of complex financial products ETH, ADA, DOT, AVAX, NEAR, EGLD & XTZ are all DeFi!

1/11) Tether is one of the greatest threats to cryptocurrency right now: With the potential of a collapse greater than Terra Luna's UST! We have to trust they hold $74B in collateral without proof! Even after the CFTC fined Tether for lying about their reserves in 2021...🧵

1/9) NEAR has finally implemented sharding! The holy grail of blockchain scaling, solving the blockchain trilemma once & for all Stateless validation was the last missing piece of the puzzle Giving us massive capacity without sacrificing decentralization, the future is now! 🧵

I am going to start a show where I will ask to be pitched by cryptocurrency founders So I can respond with criticism & bring the listeners along on that journey In some cases, I will come in fresh, so you can learn with me I am making a schedule; so join me by responding here:

1/9) BTC is a dinosaur; the technology is ridiculously out-of-date At an embarrassing 7-13 max Transaction-Per-Second, it is in a position to disrupt nothing All while being the most inefficient possible, as it excels at nothing From utility to economics, BTC is a failure: 🧵

Roger Ver is one of Bitcoins greatest heroes That is why the BTC maxis attack him, as he exposes their lies The truth is that BTC was hijacked & perverted by bad actors, destroying Satoshi's vision History has been laid bare for all to see, as the truth will set us free: 🧵 Bitcoin was meant to be used as money & a store of value, the hijackers (Core) went on to destroy BTC's money-like properties; by arbitrarily restricting the capacity of the network, contrary to Satoshi's original plans for the project This all means that today BTC cannot be used as a form of money (medium of exchange) at scale at all. Annihilating BTC's former potential to serve as a type of "freedom money", as now mass adoption is only possible through centralized custodians... To make things even worse these changes have dire consequences for the long-term security budget, to the point where BTC will completely collapse somewhere between 4 to 12 years from now... We have covered this in far more detail elsewhere, the point of this thread is not to improve on those in scope Instead, today's focus is on Roger, the hero of our story, as like me he fought against these changes, refusing to back down, except he was not just another Bitcointalk lurker like I was at that time. He was the first angel investor in Bitcoin, when I joined in 2013 he even had the nickname of "Bitcoin Jesus" as he tirelessly evangelized Bitcoin's vision to the world & did more than anyone else to bring crypto into the mainstream in those very early days Back then I was still a die-hard Bitcoiner myself, as I believed in Satoshi's vision thoroughly & still do to this very day, like Roger, we did not change, but BTC did! To watch the thing you love more than anything else in this world get perverted & destroyed in this way is tragic, which is why we fought in the block-size wars, to decide on BTC's fate. We lost that battle but not the war as the altcoins carry on that vision today instead Some like to tell romantic stories about those days from Core's perspective, as if it is some sort of romantic triumph of good over evil & that this represents a victory of the people... Nothing could be further from the truth, as the vast majority of our industry supported a capacity increase, from users, companies & miners. Core still got it their way, the perfect example of a totally centralized decision-making process; this was straight-up dictatorial! Even to the point of a mass censorship campaign over all of the major communication channels at that time, where anyone who supported increasing capacity was banned, even discussing the censorship got you banned. This censorship still happens to this day. Thankfully the more prominent crypto discussions have since moved to X so I can say these things out loud here History easily could have turned out very differently, if for example certain exchanges flipped the naming schemes between the BTC & BCH forks... As this also heavily influenced public perceptions. As it was in fact a bait & switch @Rogerkver's & @Steveinpursuit's book "Hijacking Bitcoin" does a great job of covering this history thoroughly, I highly recommend reading it On a more personal note; I watched all of my heroes fall starting from 2013, as I admired many of these public figures, who one by one sold out or betrayed the principles of this movement. Roger is one of the few heroes still standing from that time in my mind Making it all the more infuriating that Roger is currently facing extradition & a lifetime in jail for not paying enough in crypto taxes to a country he revoked his citizenship for years before. This all happened right after he published his book, which is also awfully suspicious This is why the BTC maxis really hate roger, as they fear him, as they are the villains in this story & Roger is Bitcoin's true hero exposing them to the light So sign the petition to #freeroger & apply pressure in anyway you can. As Roger Ver is a man who obviously has a very keen sense of justice, that passion is in his bones. So for such a man to face such an incredibly unjust sentence is something we all should fight against. As now is the time for us to give back to the man that has given us so much

You cannot scale a blockchain through L2s As it routes traffic away from the chain instead of actually scaling it In reality, L2s are parasitically in competition with the L1 over fees! This is why restricting L1 capacity in favor of L2s is a perversion; born from corruption!

Blockchains should be scalable & programmable! Decentralization is also critical; two factors are governance & permissionlessness. Unfortunately, out of the top 100, only 13 meet these 4 criteria: 🧵 1. BTC: ❌ 2. ETH: ❌ 5. SOL: ✅ 7. XRP: ❌ 9. TON: ✅ 10. DOGE: ❌ 11. ADA: ❌ 12. TRON: ✅ 14. AVAX: ✅ 16. BCH: ❌ 17. DOT: ❌ 22. LTC: ❌ 23. NEAR: ✅ 24: KAS: ❌ 26. MATIC: ❌ 28: ICP: ✅ 30. XLM: ❌ 31. ETC: ❌ 32. APT: ✅ 33. XMR: ❌ 35. SUI: ✅ 38. FIL: ❌ 42. ATOM: ❌ 43. HBAR: ❌ 44. VET: ❌ 46. ARB: ❌ 52. OP: ❌ 64. TIA: ❌ 72. ALGO: ❌ 76. FTM: ✅ 78. SEI: ✅ 83. BSV: ❌ 86. EGLD: ✅ 91. EOS: ✅ 95. NEO: ❌ 96. XTZ: ✅ 100. STRK: ❌ Now it is time for the disclaimers; For scalability, I counted all chains that are capable of exceeding 1k max theoretical TPS (simple 1 to 1 TXs) For programmability, I counted all chains that have a Turing complete VM For on-chain governance, I counted all chains with formalized on-chain voting systems, even if they are still at an early stage of development For permissionlessness, I made it a binary option, unlike other factors that do exist on a spectrum. For this, you can look up the individual critiques I did for those chains A green check does not count as my endorsement; it simply means it passes these objective criteria. However, a red cross does imply a critique, as it implies that the chain is missing some critical features This might be frustrating for some, as I put a simple red cross behind their hopes & dreams, maybe even judging someone's life work so briefly However, we do need some objective standards in cryptocurrency. Otherwise, the consumer will remain lost in a sea of narratives where everything is unique & nothing can be compared If your favorite chain got a red cross, maybe consider pushing for improvements instead of attacking the messenger. Alternatively, you might not think scalability, decentralization, or programmability is important; I obviously strongly disagree, but people will have different priorities I have spent plenty of time arguing for those principles in other threads, which you can easily lookup We should maintain a pluralist approach, as our loyalties should lie in the underlying principles, not any individual chain. Becoming a maximalist totally blinds us to the competition, so remain diversified, not just financially but also intellectually! If you want any clarification or disagree, let me know below, I will be happy to engage with you on this one We should also view this list positively, as it still represents a massive improvement over only a few years ago, ofcourse, there is still plenty of room for improvement, but at the same time, we can celebrate some degree of success here I am eternally grateful that Satoshi's original vision is being realized, even if it is not under the Bitcoin name. For better or worse, that does at least provide smart investors a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to play the contrarian That is where making money & fighting for what you truly believe in align, as that is also what makes cryptocurrency such a unique beast; a righteous bull eternally raging for our freedom!