Thread by @balajis

Lyn is very smart — but Ethereum really isn’t that early in development anymore. Just from a numbers standpoint, it’s a $100B+ platform hosting multiple billion dollar projects. See defipulse.com.

That doesn’t begin to touch the tech innovation, which is substantial.

https://twitter.com/LynAldenContact/status/1352426811381207040

I don’t think it’s persuasive to say “Ethereum is still rapidly innovating therefore it’s not worth $100B+”.

Actually, for a platform worth $100B+ to still be rapidly innovating is a very positive signal. Excessive risk aversion is the ultimate risk.
businessinsider.com/amazons-jeff-b…

Perhaps the most important difference between a tech investor and a macro investor (like @LynAldenContact) is that Lyn explicitly says she wants to invest in “finished products”.

A reasonable approach, but one that limits upside. newsletter.banklesshq.com/p/open-reply-t…

It’s not irrational. If you’re running a large fund, or you are very risk-averse, then you may well want to invest in finished products. That’s the Buffett model: go after blue chip cash cows.

For an early adopter, though, it is amazing that BTC is now in that “safe” category!

Also: perhaps many Buffett-style cash cows are actually vulnerable to disruption. That style of investing may only work for a period where short-term volatility was traded for long-term risk (eg QE, social security) & rapid innovation was prevented by regulation. For another day.

With that said, read Lyn’s post (lynalden.com/ethereum-analy…) & the Bankless response (newsletter.banklesshq.com/p/open-reply-t…) in full.

Lyn knows more than most in the space, she’s not a hater, and some of her points (esp re: well-known Infura centralization risk) identify key areas to prioritize.