Thread by @cburniske

One of my favorite interviews I've done over the years in #crypto. A balanced & calm conversation between a #bitcoin minimalist and a crypto VC. whatbitcoindid.com/podcast/chris-… 🙏 @PeterMcCormack

A few too-long-didn't-listen takeaways: many #cryptoassets are shaping up as supply-side focused instruments that'll accrue value for providing suppliers access to "value-flows," similar to how a stock provides access to "cash-flows." Demand-side may not need native token at all.

Such #cryptoassets are more a replacement for equities, than for currencies, and majority of value will be projected via "discounted-value-flow" (DVF) models.

For those that have a demand-side component, there is likely to be an MV = PQ sleeve, requiring sum-of-the parts models

It's my belief that the majority of #cryptoassets (in #) will end up this^ way.

Such assets will only succeed if they power a network that produces 1) an in-demand, novel service, or 2) an established service on-par in quality to existing competitors, but > 50% cheaper.

The economics of success are cut-and-dry.

In number, true #cryptocurrencies will be far fewer, though as has been discussed to death, value capture will be significant for the winners.

MV = PQ remains our best bet for PoW-powered currencies, with @HASHCIB's waterfall the most robust iteration: medium.com/@HASHCIB/the-n…

Will write more about how I'm currently viewing #crypto value accrual & valuation soon, but moving away from that, @PeterMcCormack and I also covered...

As @fredwilson has also pointed out, #crypto represents a backlash against the long path to liquidity that we've seen with VC-backed companies like @Uber or @Airbnb.

As with all backlashes, it initially began out-of-balance.

Over their 400+ years of existence, equities have developed strong filters in the path to liquidity. While this has improved quality, it has limited retail's access.

#Blockchains (and in particular, the ERC-20 standard) collapsing the cost of asset creation have allowed for instant liquidity & open access, but poor filters (thus far).

But all revolutions temper with time, and we already see regulation working its way into #crypto.

So while we may see sketchy things being done now, it's important to realize the progression doesn't end here.

Debates in crypto are too often about the current "static-state" of things, as opposed to the likely progression. All things change with time.

We also discussed how debates in crypto are too often filled with vitriol and ego.

While any single project may think they're doing the best thing by defending themselves, if you think of "crypto as a collective," such behavior inhibits us from reaching our maximum potential.

In particular for #Bitcoin, I encouraged the community of maximalists/minimalists/etc to think of the progression of communication that best suits $BTC at each stage of its development.

Turning to governance, it's important to realize decisions will always need to be made.

Decisions will also need to be made about how decisions will be made.

Deciding to create no structure for how decisions will be made is a decision in-and-of-itself.

What I believe is important is a #cryptonetwork's ability to remain cohesive through its decision pathways.

This is extra hard b/c in #crypto we mostly communicate through digital mediums, where everyone is meaner than they are in physical mediums.

With the stakes high, communication poor, and forking very easy, there's too quick a tendency to fork-off, which I worry can ultimately bleed out #cryptonetworks, or at the very least retard growth.

Life is all about compromises, with yourself, and with others.

Having tools to resolve differences, or agree to disagree, and then move forward as a collective, is important for a #cryptonetwork to remain maximally diverse yet cohesive.

And biology has taught us that diversity of species leads to the most robust ecosystems.

Equally in crypto, diversity of thought & skill combined with cohesion of decision pathways (ie, governance) should win out over the long term.

For reasons I explain in the @WhatBitcoinDid pod, #Bitcoin may be the only network able to get away with "governance by defection," as opposed to "governance by cohesion." But I still don't think it helps.

There was more, such as:
-my ethics as a partner @placeholdervc
-peter's intent w/ his pod
-equities = proprietary-assets; cryptoassets = open-source-assets
-stocks overweight investors, underweight everyone else
-@coinbase's role in crypto
-#Bitcoin's dominance across metrics

Thank you @PeterMcCormack for working to bridge the gap between #Bitcoin and the rest of #crypto. It's important work. Your prefessionalism, earnestness, and yet willingness to disagree is commendable.