Thread by @kevinakwok

As always remarkably impressed by vitalik's writing. Do think he's writing at a level that few are matching in discourse with him, which is shame.

Personally, I think two additions that it's not clear market has consensus on are
1. is financialization a core attribute or a tempo

https://twitter.com/VitalikButerin/status/1442039126606311427

rary distribution method for crypto

2. is the reliance on exit as the safeguard a temporary or long term solution. Which implies views on the long term stability of individual crypto projects vs constant churn due to the incentives towards defection we've seen market give today

subpoint buried within the 2nd point is that I think there's probably a better understanding of some kind of meta-project players where you should see exit into new tokens not as churn but as capture of a more informed / capitalized elite in crypto. And I suspect the data would

bear this out if we looked at early entrants by wallet

Someone should do a long term analysis of what the cryptonomics of projects will look like.

It makes sense we see differentials in economics given to early vs late stage of these projects given we live in a primarily market share capture phase. In many ways I suspect the lessons

from social will apply here as well. With the dynamics of distribution, cost, value added above replacement etc being very different in the "building the roads" phase than after.

Implied in many projects economics is that their subsidization will dissipate with scale. which one

could view as belief they will have true network effects and dominance at that point. or that the cycle will continue and a new token can given preferential economics to vampire attack them essentially. Understanding what long term steady state cryptonomics looks like is needed

to understand if and where it must be supplemented to balance out capture. In general I agree it will definitely have capture without some intentional planning here. All markets (except those with continual exogenous shocks) do eventually imo.

crypto already has developed a more robust social regulation than I would have expected five years ago. Which is both surprising because it exists, and because of how hard many in crypto try to argue it doesn't exist and is a bad thing

anyways if you've read this far down. I'm guessing you work in crypto, and if so

I am asking you once again to please write good reply essays to @VitalikButerin. so he is not just talking into the wind