teddit

half-baked thoughts on current FC memecoin mania (of which i am a passive participant):

the key difference b/w what's going on here vs pump.fun / X is our access and exposure; we get to be early and early more often because AI has made it easy for anyone to spin up a memecoin and get distribution all-in-one.

more early access = more wealth, so ofc it will be embraced esp by those getting early access; there are still in vs out group dynamics.

otherwise, its the same primitive (casino) just with enhanced features that improve trading efficiency; the built-in social context makes us trade more quickly and confidently bc we save time not switching from tiktok to X to pump.fun, verifying social handles, etc.

degen and anon are most interesting to me due to their application (innovation; social tipping + zk account access) and integration (growth hack). note both were airdropped based on proof of commitment: degen for early active FC users, anon for supercast paid users.

these are exceptions, not the norm.

many familiar and unobjectionable statements here! 

also two key points I think ted misses

1. pump and most launchpads make money from a fee on token creation, and swap fees, ie they win from high volume on speculative assets. most casino coins die. 

clanker makes the vast majority of our fee share from larger, longer lasting coins. we get way less benefit from short term slop that dies fast. we won't incentivize coin creation, we can incentivize building cool stuff, culture! 

2. pump has no economic mechanism to return value to users, token creators or the ecosystem. 

clanker does, we launched with one, and will add more. fees are powerful, and they should be embedded within and distributed throughout the social networks that drive culture and create value, not get captured by a single app. 

we *did not* set out to build a copy of pumpfun, there are a ton of those on base already. btw if you're new here, ted always has thoughtful posts on the network, a must follow!

1. changing the fee structure doesn’t change the primitive, even if the fee structure is vastly better (which yours is)

2. most buyers (and there’s more buyers than creators) of memecoins don’t consider the fee given they have to agree to a fee regardless in order to opt in to a potential 10x (like a tax)

helping build farcaster | surfing @ venice, ca | eating @ gjusta / gjelina | “lucky me, lucky mud”

I don't totally follow

which primitive are you talking about? I'm just pointing out that unlike most launchpads, which directly benefit from short term speculative volume, we've started from a different point, and as a result are pursuing different goals 

same for fees. any launchpad with bonding curves + graduation, or creation fees is incentivized to pursue short term, speculative trading by design. we are not

the primary primitive = memecoins, derivative primitive = token launchpad

my point is the primitives are the same, but the biggest key difference is our access to them.

the fees/incentives may be different too but the impact of those haven't played out yet, and all the above doesn't change the primitive.

products are built on the same primitive w/ dif goals all the time (aave vs compound, both lending; uniswap vs curve, both AMMs). that's a good thing. i'm glad there's an alternative to pump.fun.

also what is the goal of clanker? it says autonomous memecoins in the bio so dont have much else to go off of