jesse.base.eth on Farcaster

jesse.base.eth pfp

I strongly disagree with Vitalik that pump is bad. pump is a nascent form of content moving onchain — thereby letting it be valued and creating real value that can flow to creators and curators who can identify content value early. there's absolutely things *around* pump (and other asset classes + venues) that are bad (e.g. people manipulating markets), but I think it's actively harmful to denigrate pump itself. onchain creativity is good — and pump has been pioneering. thank you to @alon and team for their leadership 🫡

37 replies

10 recasts

90 reactions

0xmons ✝️ pfp

what valuable work do u think the ppl who make these tokens are contributing? like what is the actual "content"? the name/ticker/image?

2 replies

0 recast

6 reactions

jesse.base.eth pfp

what's the actual content of a social media post? name/description/image :)

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

0xmons ✝️ pfp

i also don't think most social media posts are very worthwhile expressions of creativity or should be tokenized

2 replies

0 recast

5 reactions

jesse.base.eth pfp

you need billions of social media posts to get millions of good ones. most get 0 engagement. that's good and healthy. same thing for tokens.

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

0xmons ✝️ pfp

https://warpcast.com/itsbasil/0x82be667b i think these are the sort of arguments i'd like to see steelmanned more otherwise i find basil's takedown pretty convincing

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

0xmons ✝️ pfp

see also: https://warpcast.com/itsbasil/0x864a90b6

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

0xmons ✝️ pfp

and https://warpcast.com/itsbasil/0x8c94cfce

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

jesse.base.eth pfp

i disagree with the underlying premise that tokenizing more things is bad or that we need to selectively tokenize to preserve attention. let the market handle it.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

0xmons ✝️ pfp

I think tokenizing more things *unselectively* is bad same reason why most protocols don't issue a token day 1

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

0xmons ✝️ pfp

You get one shot if at that to rally attention in the market You cannot "relaunch" the day 1 experience

2 replies

0 recast

2 reactions

jesse.base.eth pfp

i agree that this is true for certain things (e.g. apps, protocols) i don't think this is true for content. every new piece of content is your one shot. coin it.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

0xmons ✝️ pfp

What is fundamentally different? Why does content get its own category? Is a protocol not just a name/image/ticker?

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

0xmons ✝️ pfp

(i mean obviously not but then you have to start talking about ephemerality)

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

0xmons ✝️ pfp

And if u believe most of these coins will go to zero, it sorta begs the q of Why issue them at all? Who are these moonshots for? (Ostensibly people with lower costs of living somewhere else in the world?) How true does that feel tho

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

jesse.base.eth pfp

- a protocol is definitely more than a piece of content - you issue all the coins, even if most go to zero, because it gives the 1% that are valuable the space to appear. this is just like most social posts getting zero engagement - you still need people to post, so you can get the bangers! - they are for everyone, everywhere i need to get back to work, but learn more over the next while :)

2 replies

0 recast

0 reaction

will pfp

maybe lets zoom in on that 1% -- what are some really good examples? content i can look at and be like "hell yes so happy this thing is tokenized it makes up for all the rest"?

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

jesse.base.eth pfp

pick your favorite tiktok video? i feel like we're tieing ourselves in knots to try and justify this. if something has 3 million views on tiktok, it undeniably has value. why should that value be controlled by a single platform? why shouldn't that value be owned by the people who like the video most? why shouldn't the creator benefit from that?

2 replies

0 recast

0 reaction

0xmons ✝️ pfp

One direct response is that on current platforms, the consumers/viewers do not pay So either you normalize picotransactions or you convince advertisers to pay you instead (as an alternative social media/hosting platform) and then funnel to consumers But there's nothing about e.g. tying content to a coin that magically creates buy pressure for the coin each time someone watches the video, right?

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

will pfp

no one is denying that content has value ofc there is value in creating content _and_ distributing content i am asking, concretely, why tokenization is [or will be] a 10x better value prop to today's creators than the web2 equivalent (relevant: https://www.shopify.com/blog/influencer-pricing) creators owning their following seems pretty valuable, although arguably e.g. substack lets you do that today. And also owning the relationships has nothing to do with tokenizing in particular my personal intuition (and admittedly biased desire) is that there are far more interesting onchain structures to bring creators, curators, and fans together in long-term alignment for the good-of-all-parties than tokenization. But I am here asking questions to learn and [try to] understand what about tokenization in particular has you so excited

1 reply

0 recast

7 reactions