6/ Problem with many of these SV VCs and crypto “thought-leaders” is they have zero understanding of Monetary Economics especially in the context of borderless free markets, free of state monopolies, legal tenders, state decrees, coercion. This is what fiat has done to society.
-
Show this thread
-
7/ Instead, they think of these as mostly purely software platforms and try to apply previous-era Web 2.0 SV paradigms and their San Fran clichés. Instead, I believe that these are moneys wrapped in software. After all, they are *cryptocurrencies*. Money first and software second
1 reply 9 retweets 70 likesShow this thread -
8/ I don’t think big asset managers, university endowments, sovereign wealth funds, commercial banks, central banks or the rich HNWIs give a shit about decentralized roulette, nomadic DAOs or some blockchain tamagotchi.
5 replies 11 retweets 79 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @MustStopMurad
Are you basing this opinion on actual conversations with such investors?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DavidJN79
yes. very actively and extensively. I am also myself one of those very people.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MustStopMurad @DavidJN79
Bad examples. They might care about self-sovereign financial instruments like lending/borrowing or digital collectibles. We have various algos and observable evidence that social networks increase in value the more they are used. Why would this be any dif?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @panekkkk @DavidJN79
Nah these billionaires only care about fixed-supply / uncensorability / privacy, if anything. They don't care about your digital cats or your other goofy stuff. Moneys != a social network websites
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @MustStopMurad @DavidJN79
Citation needed. It’s not about digital cats it’s about the increased usage and moneyness that such use cases bring. BTC will need intense proselytizing to achieve the same level of belief as simple usage brings. Not impossible but significantly harder.
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @panekkkk @MustStopMurad
What panek wrote; most of my peers in family office land who’ve been investing in traditional early stage direct venture diligence LTV, retention, churn and other network kpi’s regularly; its part of their rigor. Milestones on user/network growth, CAC, etc all required
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Evaluating potential money systems is not the same as evaluating a SaaS startup.
3 replies 1 retweet 9 likes
^what he said. These are startup metrics. Half of these don't even apply to emerging money-forms. In my view, Seed Investing is less applicable and Monetary Economics / Monetary History is more applicable here.
-
-
Never before in history could you seed invest in a new money/economy with the tools and knowledge that we have at our disposable. This is a different game entirely.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
I agree with you. I still think, these are Money first and Software second. (Money wrapped in Software). So various aspects of coins' Monetary characteristics are very important to consider.
0 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.