Content
@
https://warpcast.com/~/channel/wylin
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
wylin
@wylin
funny to see the eth narrative shifting from “credible neutrality” to “we need to push our core values”
2 replies
0 recast
3 reactions
gami.eth
@gami.eth
ironically its credible neutrality is what enables the pushing of one’s core values 😅
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
wylin
@wylin
that makes no sense Gami
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
gami.eth
@gami.eth
the features that give everyone the freedoms, also applies to those who steward those features. how does that not make sense?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
gami.eth
@gami.eth
one begets the other
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
wylin
@wylin
except it doesn’t, unless the begetting is the enablement by increased relevancy & financial means. for the same stewards of credible neutrality to now be the stewards of a particular values system is for those stewards to abandon their first goal in favor of another no one can serve two masters
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
gami.eth
@gami.eth
ethereum is credibly neutral how that is expressed isn't ethereum's fault the fact the platform is credibly neutral is the reason anyone can express whatever values they want to ethereum foundation is not ethereum sorry, i feel like we are actually making the same point, but have crossed wires?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
gami.eth
@gami.eth
crypto solves counterparty risk provides a credibly neutral environment coordination is inherently values driven maybe i misread your earlier cast
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
gami.eth
@gami.eth
i think we might be talking about different layers. ethereum as a protocol stays credibly neutral, but its stewards can still risk losing their neutrality if they push specific values. maybe we're both right, just looking from different angles? anyway, i'm tired and retarded lol
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
wylin
@wylin
me too man yes, we’re talking about different layers. i agree with you in actually my posts are often from the perspective of a “common” person who doesn’t understand these sort of distinctions, even if i do personally do most people outside of our crypto bubble will assume a Foundation with the same name as a chain is the company behind the chain, Vitalik is the founder of Eth after all they’re not technically correct, but the distinction, even to me at times, feels somewhat like academic hairsplitting my concern is that the stewards reputation bleeds onto the chain’s reputation and right now they appear reactionary & hypocritical. maybe it doesn’t matter because Blackrock has already chosen eth as their L1 of choice for tokenization and L2s will abstract away the L1. who knows, i too am a tired retard
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
