visit
One of the most entertaining discussion panels was the one with Ryan Selkis (Messari), Martin Koeppleman (Gnosis) and Udi Wertheimer (Reckless Review). Udi wore a Toxic Maximalist t-shirt, making his position quite clear: this was a debate on value and viability of cryptocurrency applications besides Bitcoin.
The debate nicely illustrated the fundamental difference in mental models of the two communities (Bitcoin & Ethereum). For Udi, the only thing valuable in context of cryptocurrencies is the censorship resistant money with immutable monetary policy. For Martin, this is only the beginning and blockchains bring two main promises: 1) to make coordination among people much easier, and 2) to enjoy the benefits of monopoly without the disadvantages of monopoly. The second promise is about having a high quality scalable services without the market dominance and rent-seeking of global corporations.
Although the debate was quite informative, the problem I have with such debates is that the usually talk past each other and aren’t really trying to “grok” the arguments of the other side. It would be hugely beneficial if Ethereum crowd understood the importance of sovereign money with little to none governance (which is Bitcoin) and if Bitcoin crowd understood the importance of building other permissionless services besides money itself.
Bitcoin maximalist is like a paranoid prepper, while Ethereum enthusiast is like a Silicon Valley hippie. Both should pay more attention to the world around them and try to find synergies with each other.
Apparently Ameen Soleimani from MolochDAO is a meme on his own and doesn’t need any further costume.
Highlight of this panel was a Vitalik soundalike (in the fox costume) discussing the cultural importance of memes in Vitalik’s typical android voice. It’s nice to see Vitalik being made tasteful fun of, especially at the Ethereum conference. The worst thing that could happen is to build up an image of a flawless leader. We should doubt human judgement (yes, I make the assumption that Vitalik indeed is from this Earth) and if humor is what it takes to realize we all have flaws (and thus our work should always be not trusted, but verified), then let’s just fire up those memes.
But jokes aside, memes were also discussed in more serious talks and panels during the conference.
One line that stuck in my head is that Bitcoin’s 21 million coins and the store of value property is itself a sort of meme - just something the community agrees on. This kind of “social contract” reasoning seems misleading to me. The main difference between Bitcoin and fiat currencies are the cryptoeconomic assurances that the promise (monetary policy, max number of coins...) will be actually upheld, because there is no way to change them by the minority rule (e.g. central bank board).
The killer feature of cryptocurrencies and the systems built on top of them is the immutability. All the talk about the immutable monetary policy being a meme and the calls for protocol governance - which will be inevitably subjective and politicizing - seems misguided to me.
Besides all the talk about DAOs and governance there was a lot of DeFi stuff going on, both at the dAppcon and at the hackathon. One thing I really appreciate about DeFi projects is the ability to actually measure the utilization - I can simply look up the onchain data and see how much capital is locked up in the smart contracts and how is the capital used. It’s quite impressive to look e.g. at 160M USD in supply and, more importantly, 46M USD in borrow - in less than a year since the money market’s launch!
Decentralized Finance (DeFi) is a perfect fit for something like Ethereum, much more than security tokens or any other attempts to tokenize real world assets. DeFi serves crypto-native use cases, so there is no need to compromise on trustlessness or permissionlessness - which is impossible if you need to perform a custody of real world assets. If done right, it also serves as a great regulatory arbitrage - there is simply nothing to regulate, at least not by today’s rules. That’s because it’s users themselves who are doing all the necessary steps to enter financial contracts such as lending, borrowing or trading on margin. What previously required a trusted third party can be done in a trustless and transparent manner through smart contracts.
So it’s no wonder that a lot of development teams would like to have a piece of the DeFi pie and contribute. At the dAppcon, Martin Koeppleman from Gnosis talked about their project of conditional markets, which are esentially bets contingent on related events (simple example: if the multicollateral DAI goes live, will it overtake singlecollateral by a certain date?). Read more about conditional markets .