matthewb.eth
@matthewb
thanks for the thoughtful reply, @benna! I agree that pandering to either "side" is not a good outcome, our goal should be for crypto to be as neutral as possible and to benefit as many people as possible. that goal is in conflict with aligning ourselves with a particular political party. imo it's worth pointing out that this pendulum swing is also the result of the dems having politicized crypto in the first place during the biden/harris admin. it didn't need to be this way. although I find the trump coins a bad look that may cause reputational damage long-term, I think Eric's take sums it up nicely (see below). there will always be nonsense, but we can choose to work on what we believe can outcompete the nonsense. the early dotcom bubble was speculative, but that didn't negate the potential of the internet. https://x.com/ErikVoorhees/status/1880768009108635657
4 replies
0 recast
13 reactions
czar
@czar
in addition I will also say that - in the moment things look much bigger and more important than they really are. it may look like the whole industry is pandering to him and he will have an outsized influence on crypto broadly. give it some time. it won’t look as bad. crypto in general is much bigger than that. he is just one character.
2 replies
0 recast
3 reactions
matthewb.eth
@matthewb
yeah, I think the trump coins are basically the "meta" right now and there is outsized focus on them. they're also extremely famous public figures, so this is to be expected. but if you zoom out, there's a bigger thing happening. like it or not, crypto is going mainstream, which is not to say that everything will be easy from here.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
