kenny 🎩
@kenny
ETH was, rightly or wrongly, building for an idealized future where the majority of onchain activity was less speculative (and therefore less dependent on robust centralized liquidity) meanwhile, I don't think Solana was building to keep liquidity in one spot to incentivize memecoins it's just a happy accident of them having a simple north star (make single chain go fast) vs ETH's idealized buildoor vision tweaking the roadmap for use cases that aren't proven yet
9 replies
4 recasts
36 reactions
ruhum
@ruhum
Base holds ~800,000 ETH so about 2.6 billion USD worth of ETH. That should be enough liquidity, no?
1 reply
0 recast
4 reactions
kenny 🎩
@kenny
yes but would still be better if there wasn't additional liquidity fractured all over Abirtrum/Optimism/etc
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
ruhum
@ruhum
It’s just network effects imo. Liquidity doesn’t really matter. Same thing could have started on any of the big L2s but there wasn’t a community for that.
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
kenny 🎩
@kenny
if it was just network effects Ethereum would've maintained their advantage, they had huge momentum the cause of the fumble was fracturing liquidity and giving Solana an edge
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
shazow
@shazow.eth
I don't believe this narrative for these reasons: 1. Memecoins barely have any liquidity at all, so talking about cross-chain liquidity is moot. 2. Base/Arbitrum does not have substantially less liquidity than Solana last I checked, and in fact has more for many token pairs. Which liquidity is most relevant here? I think the simplest explanation is that there are memes/narratives that default onboarding to Solana, and that's where the attention for this is. There's also different ones that default onboarding to Base. But I don't think anyone would argue that today's memes that are onboarding people are the same memes that are going to scale to billions of users, right?
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
