The current media attack on Ethereum strongly resembles the ones previously directed at Bitcoin—where the media later "apologizes" (read: mocks) for their misleading narratives. But let's put two and two together. What’s happening in the crypto market? Ethereum has many so-called "killers," though most of them look more like self-destructive projects: Solana – Makes a lot of money and runs fast (with occasional lunch breaks), but builds its brand mainly through memes. Tron – A laundromat for USDt that processes massive volumes but does little else; even its “cheap” transactions now require either locking up hundreds of dollars or paying much higher fees. Hyperliquid – A fast and efficient blockchain that mostly siphons liquidity from the EVM ecosystem. However, it remains a fully anonymous but not truly decentralized project with limited utility. Others – From Near, which pivoted to AI, to dYdX, which migrated away from the Ethereum ecosystem to its own infrastructure. At first glance, Ethereum’s situation seems dire, if not outright catastrophic. But I don't see it that way. Here are some key points—not to persuade, but to share. The Trilemma According to this concept, you must choose one of the three: Decentralization Security Scalability Most have chosen scalability and promoted security, and have completely forgotten about decentralization. Solana is not decentralized at all, while Hyperliquid is only decentralized in words. As for truly decentralized systems that do not face major scalability concerns, there are only two today: Bitcoin Ethereum Ethereum lost a significant part of its audience after mining stopped being selfish. However, this move also led to an explosion of competition, as the majority of blockchains now operate on PoS and its variations. Yet, Ethereum still prioritizes decentralization. Is this important? I believe it is. Here are some key arguments: If decentralization is not as critical as crypto-enthusiasts claim, then there is no real need for Web 3.0. Web 2.5 would be enough, but it would repeat past failures like FTX, Terra (LUNA/UST), 3AC, Celsius, etc. Decentralization is security. Many believe that complete transparency weakens security, but the opposite is true—it actually enhances it by ensuring that everything is verifiable. Capital efficiency improves with decentralization. The MEV market has developed within Ethereum, not Bitcoin (where selfish mining exists) or Solana (which lacks a mempool and relies on a centralized yet high-speed solution). Perhaps you disagree with these arguments. That’s fair—your opinion matters. However, I firmly believe that decentralization, openness, and anonymity form the foundation of blockchains and DAGs (where decentralization is replaced by distribution). Meanwhile, DLTs like XRP Ledger or CBDCs function differently and don’t necessarily require full decentralization. Moreover, decentralization can address systemic failures that fuel every financial crisis—be it 1903, 1907, 1929, or 2008. Only well-collateralized, cross-chain liquid markets provide true transparency and interoperability. Centralized markets will always deceive, showcasing fake ratings, audits, and reports that cannot be independently verified. And finally, unlike many projects, Ethereum is not developed by a single team, as many assume. Consensys is not the Ethereum Foundation, as Vitalik himself recently clarified. And this is just one example. Ethereum — The Laboratory of Everything Yes, exactly. NFTs, as "colored coins," first appeared in Bitcoin, but until the ERC-721 standard was introduced in 2018, there were no real NFTs. Look at the token standards in Solana or Aptos—they change them like gloves, and even after years, they remain unfinished. And in Bitcoin? Doesn't BRC-20 ring any bells? The same memes that Solana takes such pride in also originated from Bitcoin (to be precise: Litecoin (Scrypt) → Doge). But Dogecoin was an outsider until Elon Musk, while Ethereum turned memes into more than just a narrative—it made them a full-fledged trend. Maybe you didn’t know, or perhaps you forgot, but: DeFi, RWA, NFT 2.0, zk-Rollups, and many other innovations—either originated in Ethereum as mass-market products or, even more importantly, were made mainstream in Ethereum. Now, what groundbreaking innovations have Tron, Solana, Aptos, or even Bitcoin introduced since 2017-2018? L2 scaling or restaking? These exist on Bitcoin, and even Solana is experimenting with them, but all of it was built through Ethereum. And by the way, the sharding that Near initially used to compete with Solana? That’s now essentially an L2 approach. Bitcoin has Lightning, but can it compare to Arbitrum, Optimism, or zk-Rollups? I don’t think so. And let’s not forget zk-EVM, which is an entirely different level. Then there are sidechains, forming yet another evolution—opBNB, zk-EVM Polygon, and more. In short, decentralization—as mentioned earlier—creates a unique playground for experimentation, something no other community can match. In fact, no other system even has such a community. Why would people feel passionate about trading memecoins, futures, and other financial gimmicks? Don’t get me wrong—I also profit from derivatives and DeFi, but at the same time, I can dive into Dark Forest theory, blobs, and endlessly evolving rollups of varying complexity. And in Solana? I can admire fast transactions. And in Tron? I can marvel at its "energy" model and almost full EVM-compatibility. Cross-Chain Liquidity This is something unique to EVM that no one else has. Right now, systems combining Solana & Ethereum or Bitcoin & Ethereum approaches are just starting to emerge. But here’s a list of EVM projects: Moonbeam – EVM for Polkadot; Aurora – EVM for Near; Neon – EVM for Solana; EVMos – EVM for Cosmos; Avalanche – inherently EVM-based; Polygon, BSC (BNB Chain) – EVM sidechains; Linea; And many more. Add Lisk, Sonic, the Superchain family, Arbitrum, zkSync, Scroll, Starknet, and dozens more, and you’ll see that things aren’t as bad as they seem. Of course, everything is changing. But in whose favor? Will everyone suddenly switch to Hyperliquid or a synthetic product from dYdX? Or will it be Solana & Bitcoin, where the first gets the hype and the second attracts miners and VCs? In my opinion, those who think so have missed the last… 10 years? They don’t realize that cross-chain liquidity has been the dream of every blockchain expert. Building it from 2015 to 2025 was no easy task, and much of it is still unfinished. Look at the Polkadot & Cosmos approaches: both are great systems (and both were ICOs on Ethereum), but they ended up being locked into their parachains and hubs, creating not decentralized but fragmented liquidity. Solana looks impressive, but how is it fundamentally better than Hyperliquid, Near, Algorand, or other fast and “carbon-neutral” solutions? Conclusion Ethereum once defeated the Bitshares (Graphene) family, including EOS, Steem, and others. It won because it implemented development through smart contracts, not rigid patterns, and successfully attracted miners and the community. Sure, Solidity developers may become obsolete, just like EVM cross-chain liquidity might fade away, and Vitalik could be wrong, just like the rest of us. But why assume that competition is over and the market is permanently divided? Neither you nor I have any reason to believe that: There are plenty of high-speed blockchains, but each of them is centralized in its own way, meaning they compete with each other rather than with Ethereum. Ethereum L2s are not competitors to Ethereum because they exist thanks to it. As long as they remain connected, the system works—but if they try to break away, it won’t end well for them. Look at dYdX: did they actually win the hype race? I don’t see it. That’s why Unichain is an L2, but on Ethereum. Bitcoin & Ethereum are truly decentralized projects, and even VCs understand their value—speculators, however, may not. But that doesn’t mean decentralization has lost its importance; it just means not everyone understands it. Not knowing quantum mechanics doesn’t mean you can manufacture processors without accounting for quantum effects. Right now, only Ethereum has cross-chain liquidity at the necessary scale, and replicating this even in 2–3 years won’t be easy. Plus, a bear market is ahead (hopefully after 2026, but we’ll see). When that happens, all these low-liquidity meme projects will crash, and then what? And yes, you can criticize Ethereum all you want, but for some reason, no one wants to take on its role as the innovation lab. Have we really built everything we wanted? I don’t think so. Simply put, I can argue with numbers or facts, and the facts tell me that the media has launched an attack on Ethereum while conveniently "forgetting" its strengths. I’ve seen this before. More than once. Have you? The current media attack on Ethereum strongly resembles the ones previously directed at Bitcoin—where the media later " apologizes " (read: mocks ) for their misleading narratives. But let's put two and two together. media apologizes mocks What’s happening in the crypto market? What’s happening in the crypto market? Ethereum has many so-called "killers," though most of them look more like self-destructive projects: Solana – Makes a lot of money and runs fast (with occasional lunch breaks), but builds its brand mainly through memes. Tron – A laundromat for USDt that processes massive volumes but does little else; even its “cheap” transactions now require either locking up hundreds of dollars or paying much higher fees. Hyperliquid – A fast and efficient blockchain that mostly siphons liquidity from the EVM ecosystem. However, it remains a fully anonymous but not truly decentralized project with limited utility. Others – From Near, which pivoted to AI, to dYdX, which migrated away from the Ethereum ecosystem to its own infrastructure. Solana – Makes a lot of money and runs fast (with occasional lunch breaks), but builds its brand mainly through memes. Solana Tron – A laundromat for USDt that processes massive volumes but does little else; even its “ cheap ” transactions now require either locking up hundreds of dollars or paying much higher fees. Tron cheap Hyperliquid – A fast and efficient blockchain that mostly siphons liquidity from the EVM ecosystem. However, it remains a fully anonymous but not truly decentralized project with limited utility. Hyperliquid Others – From Near , which pivoted to AI, to dYdX , which migrated away from the Ethereum ecosystem to its own infrastructure. Others Near dYdX own At first glance, Ethereum’s situation seems dire, if not outright catastrophic. But I don't see it that way. Here are some key points—not to persuade, but to share. outright The Trilemma According to this concept, you must choose one of the three : three Decentralization Security Scalability Decentralization Decentralization Security Security Scalability Scalability Most have chosen scalability and promoted security , and have completely forgotten about decentralization . Solana is not decentralized at all, while Hyperliquid is only decentralized in words. scalability security decentralization As for truly decentralized systems that do not face major scalability concerns, there are only two today: Bitcoin Ethereum Bitcoin Bitcoin Ethereum Ethereum Ethereum lost a significant part of its audience after mining stopped being selfish . However, this move also led to an explosion of competition, as the majority of blockchains now operate on PoS and its variations. selfish PoS Yet, Ethereum still prioritizes decentralization. Is this important? I believe it is. Here are some key arguments: If decentralization is not as critical as crypto-enthusiasts claim, then there is no real need for Web 3.0. Web 2.5 would be enough, but it would repeat past failures like FTX, Terra (LUNA/UST), 3AC, Celsius, etc. Decentralization is security. Many believe that complete transparency weakens security, but the opposite is true—it actually enhances it by ensuring that everything is verifiable. Capital efficiency improves with decentralization. The MEV market has developed within Ethereum, not Bitcoin (where selfish mining exists) or Solana (which lacks a mempool and relies on a centralized yet high-speed solution). If decentralization is not as critical as crypto-enthusiasts claim, then there is no real need for Web 3.0. Web 2.5 would be enough, but it would repeat past failures like FTX, Terra (LUNA/UST), 3AC, Celsius, etc. If decentralization is not as critical Decentralization is security . Many believe that complete transparency weakens security, but the opposite is true—it actually enhances it by ensuring that everything is verifiable. Decentralization is security actually Capital efficiency improves with decentralization . The MEV market has developed within Ethereum, not Bitcoin (where selfish mining exists) or Solana (which lacks a mempool and relies on a centralized yet high-speed solution). Capital efficiency improves with decentralization Solana mempool Perhaps you disagree with these arguments. That’s fair—your opinion matters. However, I firmly believe that decentralization, openness, and anonymity form the foundation of blockchains and DAGs (where decentralization is replaced by distribution). Meanwhile, DLTs like XRP Ledger or CBDCs function differently and don’t necessarily require full decentralization. Moreover, decentralization can address systemic failures that fuel every financial crisis—be it 1903, 1907, 1929, or 2008. Only well-collateralized, cross-chain liquid markets provide true transparency and interoperability. Centralized markets will always deceive, showcasing fake ratings, audits, and reports that cannot be independently verified. And finally, unlike many projects, Ethereum is not developed by a single team, as many assume. Consensys is not the Ethereum Foundation, as Vitalik himself recently clarified. And this is just one example. Ethereum — The Laboratory of Everything Yes, exactly. NFTs, as "colored coins," first appeared in Bitcoin, but until the ERC-721 standard was introduced in 2018, there were no real NFTs. Look at the token standards in Solana or Aptos—they change them like gloves, and even after years, they remain unfinished. And in Bitcoin? Doesn't BRC-20 ring any bells? The same memes that Solana takes such pride in also originated from Bitcoin (to be precise: Litecoin ( Scrypt ) → Doge). But Dogecoin was an outsider until Elon Musk, while Ethereum turned memes into more than just a narrative—it made them a full-fledged trend. Scrypt Maybe you didn’t know, or perhaps you forgot, but: DeFi, RWA, NFT 2.0, zk-Rollups, and many other innovations—either originated in Ethereum as mass-market products or, even more importantly, were made mainstream in Ethereum. Now, what groundbreaking innovations have Tron, Solana, Aptos, or even Bitcoin introduced since 2017-2018? L2 scaling or restaking? These exist on Bitcoin, and even Solana is experimenting with them, but all of it was built through Ethereum. And by the way, the sharding that Near initially used to compete with Solana? That’s now essentially an L2 approach . Bitcoin has Lightning, but can it compare to Arbitrum, Optimism, or zk-Rollups? I don’t think so. And let’s not forget zk-EVM, which is an entirely different level. Then there are sidechains, forming yet another evolution—opBNB, zk-EVM Polygon, and more. L2 approach In short, decentralization—as mentioned earlier—creates a unique playground for experimentation, something no other community can match. In fact , no other system even has such a community. Why would people feel passionate about trading memecoins, futures, and other financial gimmicks? Don’t get me wrong—I also profit from derivatives and DeFi, but at the same time, I can dive into Dark Forest theory, blobs, and endlessly evolving rollups of varying complexity. In fact Dark Forest And in Solana? I can admire fast transactions. And in Tron? I can marvel at its "energy" model and almost full EVM - compatibility . EVM compatibility Cross-Chain Liquidity This is something unique to EVM that no one else has. Right now, systems combining Solana & Ethereum or Bitcoin & Ethereum approaches are just starting to emerge. But here’s a list of EVM projects: Moonbeam – EVM for Polkadot; Aurora – EVM for Near; Neon – EVM for Solana; EVMos – EVM for Cosmos; Avalanche – inherently EVM-based; Polygon, BSC (BNB Chain) – EVM sidechains; Linea; And many more. Moonbeam – EVM for Polkadot; Moonbeam Aurora – EVM for Near; Aurora Neon – EVM for Solana; Neon EVMos – EVM for Cosmos; EVMos Avalanche – inherently EVM-based; Avalanche Polygon, BSC (BNB Chain) – EVM sidechains; Polygon, BSC (BNB Chain) Linea; Linea; And many more. Add Lisk, Sonic, the Superchain family, Arbitrum, zkSync, Scroll, Starknet , and dozens more, and you’ll see that things aren’t as bad as they seem. Lisk, Sonic, the Superchain family, Arbitrum, zkSync, Scroll, Starknet Of course, everything is changing. But in whose favor? Will everyone suddenly switch to Hyperliquid or a synthetic product from dYdX ? Or will it be Solana & Bitcoin , where the first gets the hype and the second attracts miners and VCs? Hyperliquid dYdX Solana & Bitcoin In my opinion, those who think so have missed the last… 10 years? They don’t realize that cross-chain liquidity has been the dream of every blockchain expert. Building it from 2015 to 2025 was no easy task, and much of it is still unfinished. Look at the Polkadot & Cosmos approaches: both are great systems (and both were ICOs on Ethereum), but they ended up being locked into their parachains and hubs, creating not decentralized but fragmented liquidity. Polkadot & Cosmos decentralized Solana looks impressive, but how is it fundamentally better than Hyperliquid, Near, Algorand, or other fast and “carbon-neutral” solutions? Hyperliquid, Near, Algorand, Conclusion Ethereum once defeated the Bitshares (Graphene) family , including EOS, Steem, and others. It won because it implemented development through smart contracts , not rigid patterns, and successfully attracted miners and the community. Bitshares (Graphene) family smart contracts Sure, Solidity developers may become obsolete, just like EVM cross-chain liquidity might fade away, and Vitalik could be wrong, just like the rest of us. EVM cross-chain liquidity Vitalik But why assume that competition is over and the market is permanently divided? Neither you nor I have any reason to believe that: There are plenty of high-speed blockchains, but each of them is centralized in its own way, meaning they compete with each other rather than with Ethereum. Ethereum L2s are not competitors to Ethereum because they exist thanks to it. As long as they remain connected, the system works—but if they try to break away, it won’t end well for them. Look at dYdX: did they actually win the hype race? I don’t see it. That’s why Unichain is an L2, but on Ethereum. Bitcoin & Ethereum are truly decentralized projects, and even VCs understand their value—speculators, however, may not. But that doesn’t mean decentralization has lost its importance; it just means not everyone understands it. Not knowing quantum mechanics doesn’t mean you can manufacture processors without accounting for quantum effects. There are plenty of high-speed blockchains , but each of them is centralized in its own way, meaning they compete with each other rather than with Ethereum. There are plenty of high-speed blockchains Ethereum L2s are not competitors to Ethereum because they exist thanks to it. As long as they remain connected, the system works—but if they try to break away, it won’t end well for them. Look at dYdX: did they actually win the hype race? I don’t see it. That’s why Unichain is an L2, but on Ethereum. Ethereum L2s are not competitors to Ethereum actually Bitcoin & Ethereum are truly decentralized projects, and even VCs understand their value—speculators, however, may not. But that doesn’t mean decentralization has lost its importance; it just means not everyone understands it. Not knowing quantum mechanics doesn’t mean you can manufacture processors without accounting for quantum effects. Bitcoin & Ethereum VCs Right now, only Ethereum has cross-chain liquidity at the necessary scale, and replicating this even in 2–3 years won’t be easy. Plus, a bear market is ahead (hopefully after 2026, but we’ll see). When that happens, all these low-liquidity meme projects will crash, and then what? And yes, you can criticize Ethereum all you want, but for some reason, no one wants to take on its role as the innovation lab. Have we really built everything we wanted? I don’t think so. really Simply put, I can argue with numbers or facts, and the facts tell me that the media has launched an attack on Ethereum while conveniently "forgetting" its strengths. I’ve seen this before. More than once. Have you? Have you?
