BP

CEO @gammastrategies opinions are my own

[BP @BP_Gamma]

I feel like I've done this with brainstorming, writing-plans, and subagent-driven-execution, but the downside is it could be a huge time suck if it doesn't execute it exactly the way you want it. I used to do this quite a bit, but I found I got better results quicker by executing task-by-task and taking over when needed.

[BP @BP_Gamma]

@TrustlessState Haven't you fudded enough for one week?

[BP @BP_Gamma]

@hicasamadim 72?

2*2*2 = 8
5*5*2 = 50
6*6*2 = 72

[BP @BP_Gamma]

@TrustlessState I think the main summary is that you sold because price didn't go up like BNB and TRX and it's not as market dominating as before. I think you fail to understand that ETH is a long-term play, and no one is playing the role that Ethereum is playing today. It's a 1 of 1.

[BP @BP_Gamma]

Good post by Vitalik. We need at least one chain like Ethereum. Too many others are optimizing for TPS and making compromises on decentralization and security. Ethereum being contrarian is making it cool again.

[vitalik.eth @VitalikButerin]

Some of my perspective on where the @ethereumfndn is going.

First of all, this is only my own view. The board is not just me, and I have no extra special powers on the board that the other board members do not. @aerugoettinea is the one executing much of this transition. My input has been largely on technical questions. The board is in the process of expanding, and my own power within the org will continue to decrease, which is honestly what I want.

The 2025 era brought many important improvements to EF and its ability to execute. Many issues were resolved, and EF continues to benefit from its improved efficiency and greater focus on concrete goals to this day. And so with those problems resolved, early this year, the largest remaining hole that I perceived was something different nagging at me: I would regularly spot people saying things like "vitalik says these beautiful things about ethereum needing to be decentralized, and have privacy, and be a sanctuary technology, but why do the EF's actions not reflect that?"

Now, you may have been hearing something different. You may not have been sensing a feeling of crisis at all, and maybe were hearing people saying that finally we were taking execution and BD seriously and the main task for us is to keep going that way and be even better and faster. Then probably there is genuine difference between you and me, in what kinds of criticism I take most seriously, and what kinds of critics through their criticism are most able to make me feel pain.

As an analogy, let's briefly switch over to a different domain.

One belief you can have about Google is that it is a success story, and has brought a lot of good to humanity in organizing the world's information. Another belief you can have about Google is that they had a beautiful idealistic beginning, but at some point the corruption of mainstream corporate attitudes seeped in, and they slowly bit by bit completely abandoned the "don't be evil" slogan.

My belief on Google specifically is probably somewhere between the two. BUT, if you had taken me back in time to ~2008, and offered me a button to press to make Google one or two standard deviations more "dogmatic", eg. give Richard Stallman permanent veto power over some key policies, I would immediately press it.

Why? Because a choice for one company is not a choice for the world, or even one country. Google existed and exists in the context of a technology industry generally drifting away from early idealistic don't-be-evil roots and toward greed for financial gain, totalizing visions of accelerated superintelligence, infiltration by sociopaths, and craven capitulation to (or worse, active participation in) government pressure for ideological control, surveillance and war. And so *one company* doing something different, positioning itself to be what George Bernard Shaw calls the Unreasonable Man, resisting the trend of the times, would have been better for freedom, balance of power and stability of society as a whole, than *all* large companies bending to dominant trends. This is a part of my version of pluralism.

This line of thinking is not just mine, but I also is not too far off from what Aya and others had in mind with the Mandate.

Now how does this all get to the role of the EF?

EF is not a "center of Ethereum", rather EF is "one node, with a defined purpose, alongside other nodes". We've always said that the EF should be the latter, but many in the Ethereum ecosystem (and even within the EF) wanted us to be the former. Now, we are taking action to ensure that we will be the latter.

This is particularly important because EF is a limited organization, with limited resources and limited organizational capacity. The EF has only ~0.16% of all ETH (less than many other individual ETH holders), whereas among other blockchains it's common for "the central foundation" to have 10-50%. Fiscally, the EF was originally designed to fulfill a limited work scope defined in the token sale docs and other pre-launch materials (building the chain software; getting through Frontier, Homestead, Metropolis, Serenity), which was fully completed in 2022; it was not designed to be an eternal steward.

And so today, the EF is choosing to use its remaining resources to pursue longevity over breadth (yes, this means we sell less ETH). The EF focuses *specifically* on those activities critical to the success of ethereum as a censorship/capture-resistant, open, private and secure system, that would not happen otherwise. This means making hard choices, and in some cases even activities that we highly approve of and people that we highly respect becoming outside of the EF. People of great technical talent, public respect and even alignment with the mission and CROPS being outside of the EF is in fact necessary if we want important tasks to be able to attract outside capital. This also means the EF taking opinionated stands culturally.

This is all intended in cooperation with all other parts of ethereum. We recognize that many other parts of the ethereum world highly respect CROPS and related values. But highly respecting is not the same as choosing to specialize and totally dedicate to a domain (Compare in a different domain: I think reducing animal cruelty is important, and I like vegan food, but am not full unconditional vegan myself)

EF is still in a transition period, and we expect its new long-term form to stabilize over the next few months. What are the guiding principles of this new form? Again, I am only one person, but I can give my answer from a technical perspective (there are also critical non-technical aspects).

At the core, *Ethereum must be impressive*. We are living in an age of highly intelligent AI and all kinds of other technological acceleration. "Status quo EVM, with a hard fork or two a year to optimize for short-term needs of users" is not interesting.

To some, "impressive" means: 250ms latency and 1M TPS. I think Ethereum trying to go that route is a mistake. Being as fast and as scalable as possible, and only a small epsilon more decentralized than the others, is a route to mediocrity, and if we try it we will lose.

I think Ethereum should scale. But I think Ethereum should strive the hardest to be deeply impressive in a different dimension: the CROPS dimension. This means things like:

* Provably bug-free Ethereum. This is a goal that all cybersecurity researchers would have thought is absurd and impossible, up until roughly 6 months ago. Now, it's on the cusp of being possible, thanks to AI-assisted formal verification. So we should be frontrunners in doing this.

* Available chain consensus. Ethereum is, and with lean consensus will cotninue to be, the ONLY chain that has both (i) traditional-BFT style properties that it's safe under asynchrony up to a high level of fault tolerance, and (ii) the bitcoin PoW-style property that under synchrony it's safe up to 49% attackers. As far as I can tell, literally no other chain has this or is planning for it; bitcoin goes for (ii) only and most other chains go for (i) only. Some will remember I fought hard for this, Unreasonably insisting that it is not OK for ethereum to rely on social consensus and hard forks to rescue ethereum from 34% of nodes going offline. It's OK for chains like hyperledger, bnb, solana, tempo, etc. It's not OK for bitcoin or ethereum or eg. zcash.

* Intermediary minimization. The fact that smart contract wallets, protocols like railgun, etc have to send transactions through intermediaries to get included onchain is honestly embarrassing, and it's a constant point of fragility. Hence the work on FOCIL and EIP-8141 (and 7701 and years of work before) to make transaction sending intermediary-minimized with public mempool and strong inclusion properties, in a truly general-purpose way, that covers not just eg. secp256r1, but also privacy protocols and much more. Kohaku is pushing intermediary minimization at the user layer, pulling Ethereum away from the dystopian status quo world where our wallets don't even verify the chain, send our private data out to a dozen third-party servers, and toward a brighter CROPS future.

Some of these goals are Unreasonable - maybe Ethereum would be "fine" getting only 50% of the way - what if we depend on intermediaries, but make it easy to switch? But going 50% of the way would not make Ethereum Deeply Impressive in the CROPS way. So we push for 100%.

Fortunately all these goals are compatible with high TPS, this is a major focus of research (esp. on scaling the state). Well-designed L2s can also help, especially L2s optimized for specific applications (eg. high-volume trading, privacy...). These goals are even compatible with significantly lower slot times, thanks to Raul's work on erasure-coded P2P, and many other optimizations.

The most high-value "product" of the ethereum blockchain, financially speaking, is ETH the asset. Ethereum secures $250 billion of ETH. The types of properties of Ethereum that I mentioned above are very good for ETH the asset. Nearly 90% of my net worth is in ETH, and most of the remainder is ~$40m of onchain fiat of which every dollar has already been allocated for some open-source biotech or software or hardware initiative. That said, there are aspects of supporting ETH the asset - *necessary* aspects even - that are outside the scope of the EF. This is where we need other heroes (some of whom hold more ETH than the EF does) to step in and help. EF has been recently thinking more about how it will relate to other such organizations, and give them needed initial support.

EF will be a smaller ship than in previous years, a more opinionated one - in some cases more opinionated in ways that might be difficult to comprehend - but a longer-lasting one, and one suited to making sure that ethereum brings something meaningful to the world. We are grateful to all those inside and outside the EF who are helping to make this happen.

[BP @BP_Gamma]

@GeneSmi96946389 Yeah true, I think there are ways to mimick the natural process, which as you mentioned isn't perfect either. But I think it still oversimplifies egg selection in ways we might not quite understand. I'd love to see more research on this area before going full Gattaca

[BP @BP_Gamma]

@Bankless @TrustlessState Lmao is this a marketing ploy to get more viewers? If so, kudos to you all.

[BP @BP_Gamma]

@hosseeb @0xlarpist @grok Yeahh $58B > $17B . Agreed Goldman makes much more, but still impressive from Binance.

[BP @BP_Gamma]

@laurashin @ryanberckmans How would you know this without knowledge of who's staying and why they left? Its confusing, but it's not enough to jump to the conclusion that they're not playing a long-term game. They've showed countless times they're sacrificing short-term gains for long-term sustainability.

[BP @BP_Gamma]

@hosseeb @0xlarpist @grok I mean it's not that different to suggest being high. Its fairly close.

[BP @BP_Gamma]

Out of all the ways to express yourself, you chose the words, “…patronage state that monetizes suffrage through politicial nonparticipation.” 😅 And referenced an authority that less than 1% of the population is familiar with.

Either way, I dont agree with your view because youre not exempting a class of people from taxation. You are exempting an income range in a marginal tax system. So everyone’s (both wealthy and non-wealthy’s) first 100k is non-taxed.

[BP @BP_Gamma]

@chooserich Best of luck brother!

[BP @BP_Gamma]

I seriously don't understand why the Bankless guys are just talking about price, price, price all the time now. Their posts remind me of those annoying price channels in discord. "NuMbA gO up PlzzZ oR I sELL"

They haven't been saying enough about all the progress Ethereum has made in the last couple years.

1. Cheaper Transactions - It's much cheaper to transact on Ethereum Mainnet now. < 0.50 cents to make swap
2. Gas Limit - I hear there's a 200M floor now??
3. Quantum Resistance
4. Focus on CROPS - I know everyone hates when chains focus on decentralization/privacy/censorship resistance, until something horrible happens.

The world needs Ethereum to exist.

[David Hoffman @TrustlessState]

Has there been a huge vibe shift in CT over the last 2 weeks, or was that just me selling the last of my ETH

[BP @BP_Gamma]

I don’t think there should be a hard and fast rule around it. It should be based on what economically makes sense. It could make sense to cut benefits and government pensions (huge cost) while giving wage earners with < 100k income tax relief. I mean the tax revenue from those people are <3% anyways.

[BP @BP_Gamma]

I feel like we're getting off-topic on whether implementing a minimum income tax floor is a good thing or not.

However, the marginal tax system does make sense in that everyone technically is taxed equally. Like everyone's first 100k won't get taxed. The reason being that everyone's basic needs should get taxed less.

[BP @BP_Gamma]

@TrustlessState You get a large amount of tokens/usage from the Codex $200 plan. Can you get similar with Venice?

[BP @BP_Gamma]

@RyanSAdams What does that even look like though? And who is doing that on other blockchains as an example? It's not like we ever see the Solana Foundation or Hyperliquid team shilling their own token.

[BP @BP_Gamma]

@sama Yeah it's amazing. Not a fan of OpenAI, but had to make the switch to codex because it was that much better. Would suggest creating annual plans that are cheaper and higher rate limit $20 plans if you want to get more people to switch and stay.