crypto

I’m all for communication, even when I don’t understand or even disagree with the other person’s view.

But this only works if both sides show up genuinely curious and committed to creating the conditions for meaningful dialogue. 

Too often, “good actors” in crypto seem more upset about being misunderstood than willing to hear valid critique.

As a synthetic biologist, I welcome hard conversations about what’s broken in my field. 

Less defensive + more openness That’s how you build a more positive future for the space.

genetically modified organism. synbio PhD. host of /synbio 🧬, co-host /science 👩🏽‍🔬, blog: editlife.substack.com

yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. all the time!

and they dismiss the feedback if they don't agree with it as if outside observers are not valuable. observations are *information* especially from people in crypto, and must be treated as such even if the observations are counter to what we may consider truth / reality.

building farcaster | surfing @ venice, ca | eating @ gjusta / gjelina | “lucky me, lucky mud” 🤠

🔊 “Observations are information” Louder for the people in the back!