Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Polkadot is trending for all the wrong reasons ethereum:0x8d010bf9c26881788b4e6bf5fd1bdc358c8f90b8 is the most-discussed asset in crypto right now, and barely any of it is bullish. Per Santiment, Polkadot's ratio of bullish to bearish comments collapsed from 6.39-to-1 a month ago to just 1.18-to-1 today. The debate driving it is whether...

15,838 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Ethereum in 2026 → What you need to know. Today ETH price is $2,104 which is almost 57% down from its all time high of $4,954 in August 2025. Fear and Greed index stands at 28. The Relative Strength Index (RSI) is approaching oversold conditions and retail interest is absent. However every on chain metric is hitting an all time high. - There are almost 35.5 million ETH staked. - Stablecoins on Ethereum have surpassed $158 billion. Tbh ETH exchange reserves are at their lowest since 2016. Spot ETH ETFs have attracted $11.6 billion in total net inflows. The network is more used, more secure and more embedded in institutions than ever yet the price remains in the fear zone. That disparity outlines the whole Ethereum narrative in 2026. - Pectra launched in May 2025 increasing the validator cap from 32 to 2,048 ETH. - Fusaka followed in December. - Glamsterdam is set for the first half of 2026 aiming for 10,000 transactions per second and over 78% reduction in gas fees through full account abstraction. - Hegota arrives in the second half with Verkle Trees pushing towards a stateless Ethereum. This upgrade pace is not slowing down. And the good thing is institutional side looks promising too. Ethereum Foundation staked 70,000 ETH in April 2026. This shift from selling ETH to fund operations to earning staking yield is significant. Yet there is an uncomfortable truth that many ignore → Layer 2 solutions like Base keep most fee revenue instead of returning it to ETH holders. Standard Chartered estimated that Base alone took $50 billion from ETH market cap. Increased Layer 2 activity does not directly translate to higher ETH value. So far this issue is unresolved concern underlying every optimistic outlook. The bullish scenario here is hinges on Glamsterdam delivering results, ETF inflows returning and the Federal Reserve lowering rates. and the bearish scenario suggests that Layer 2 value capture issue remains unresolved. Its crazy that the divergence between fundamentals and price is not a temporary dislocation but a structural issue. Right now the critical level to watch is $2,080. If it drops below that the bearish case becomes serious. Honestly fundamentals keep getting stronger while the price continues lagging behind. Next six months will determine which perspective will prevail.

evans

17,498 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

‼️An interesting interview with Lavrov Sergey Lavrov regularly gives interviews, and almost every one of them is an information operation designed to create an alternative reality. The March 26 interview with France Télévisions is no exception. Let's break it down and point out where there are lies and where there is manipulation. 1. Lavrov claims that Russia is supposedly defending international law while speaking in the "language of principles" regarding Iran. What's wrong: it's basic role reversal. Moscow is trying to speak from the position of a "guardian of the law," even though it is waging an aggressive war against Ukraine. In the case of Iran, Lavrov is also deliberately omitting half the picture: yes, the US withdrew from the nuclear deal, but Iran also faced non-proliferation concerns raised by the IAEA. Why it matters: It is an attempt to whitewash Russia's crimes through someone else's crisis and to present the aggressor (Russia) as the judge. 2. Russia does not provide Iran with intelligence; the coordinates of US bases are "already known to everyone." What's wrong: it's an evasive statement, not a complete refutation. There is no independently verified evidence of specific target marking data transfers in open sources, nor can there be, but the Kremlin's "we have nothing to do with it" claim has no basis for being automatically considered true. Why it matters: A typical Kremlin tactic - to deny anything that does not align with Russia's interests and to continue operating in a gray area. 3. Saudi Arabia and the UAE have denied the US access to their airspace, so Russia is right about the "American venture." What's wrong: The caution of Gulf countries is real, but Lavrov turns it into a crude anti-Western caricature. Regional politics are more complex than the Kremlin's narrative that "everyone understands everything, only the US is pushing the world into chaos." Why it matters: The Kremlin takes a partial truth and builds a convenient political myth around it. 4. Russia isn't waging wars for its own gain; it's the US that wants to control the energy sector, the Strait of Hormuz, and the markets. What's wrong: It's pure projection. It is Russia that has used energy as a weapon for years, and after 2022, turned petrodollars into fuel for war. Why it matters: Moscow accuses others of doing what it does systematically - this is one of the central techniques of its propaganda. 5. Since 2014, Ukraine has been ruled by a "Nazi regime" that came to power through a coup. What's wrong: After Yanukovych fled, Ukraine held snap presidential elections, which the OSCE recognized as meeting international standards and being competitive. The claim of a "Nazi regime" is a political label, not a description of reality. Why it matters: "Nazism" in Kremlin rhetoric is a tool for dehumanizing Ukraine and justifying the war. 6. The Russian language is allegedly completely banned in Ukraine. What's wrong: Ukraine has strengthened the role of the state language, but this does not mean a total ban on Russian. The law does not apply to private communication and does not criminalize the everyday use of the language. Why it matters: The Kremlin is exaggerating language policy to the level of a "linguistic apocalypse" to sell the war as a supposed humanitarian mission. 7. Ukraine is allegedly at war with Orthodoxy and has "banned the canonical church." What's wrong: This is not about "banning a faith," but about a law regarding religious organizations linked to the Russian Orthodox Church. Even criticism from human rights activists does not support the Kremlin's claim of "persecution of Orthodoxy." Why it matters: Moscow is using the language of religious protection to cover up its network of influence in Ukraine. 8. The West allegedly cynically exploited the Minsk agreements as a respite to arm Ukraine. What's wrong: The Minsk process was collapsing because of the Kremlin's desire to use the agreements to establish de facto control over Ukraine, not because of some "cunning plot" by Paris and Berlin. Why it matters: The Kremlin is rewriting history retroactively to portray its own aggression as a supposedly forced response to "universal betrayal." 9. Russia does not attack civilians; its targets are solely facilities associated with the AFU. What's wrong: It's an outright lie. For years, the UN and independent sources have documented systematic Russian strikes on cities, residential areas, energy facilities, and civilian infrastructure. Why it matters: This is no longer just propaganda, but a cynical denial of documented terror against civilians. 10. The Bucha massacre is allegedly "not proven": there are no names, no evidence, and journalists haven't shown anything. What's wrong: This is one of the most mendacious claims. There are UN documents, testimonies, criminal investigations, identified suspects, and evidence of executions and killings of civilians. Why it matters: The Kremlin is not trying to refute the crime, but to wear down the audience with doubt and turn mass murder into "one of the versions." 11. Russia wants peace and negotiations. What's wrong: In the Kremlin's vocabulary, "peace" does not mean an end to aggression, but rather acceptance of its results. "Realities on the ground" means occupation; "root causes" means demanding recognition of Russia's right to punish neighbors for their political choices. Why it matters: Lavrov isn't offering peace. He's dressing up surrender in softer language. 12. Europe is supposedly dragging out the war, while Russia is looking for a solution. What's wrong: Russia started this war itself. European aid to Ukraine is a response to the aggression, not its cause. Why it matters: This is the main inversion of Kremlin logic - to make the audience forget who attacked first and shift the discussion from aggression to a "conflict that has dragged on too long." 13. RT and Sputnik are victims of censorship, and France has no right to speak about freedom of speech. What's wrong: RT and Sputnik were banned not as "ordinary media," but as state-run tools of disinformation. Their role as propaganda channels has been publicly acknowledged both in the EU and in France. Why it matters: The Kremlin wants to portray the defense of democracies against malicious information operations as a restriction of free speech. 14. France and Europe have made Russia an enemy; Moscow is merely reacting. What's wrong: The cause of the rift is not "Russophobia," but Russia's invasion, war crimes, blackmail, and influence operations against Europe. Why it matters: The Kremlin is systematically trying to reverse the cause-and-effect relationship: it is not that "Russia destroyed relations," but that "the West rejected Russia." 15. Individual real episodes - the tanker, incidents in France, disputes among allies - allegedly prove Western hypocrisy and justify Russia. What's wrong: Lavrov takes a real but local fact and uses it as a smokescreen. None of these incidents erases Russia's crimes or the very fact of its aggression. Why it matters: This is a favorite Kremlin method - using others' difficulties and whataboutism to cover up its own crimes.

Anton Gerashchenko

88,596 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten