"Anyway, I don’t see why people are really panicking about this so much. It is clearly a self-correcting problem.

The same moral panic did not exist when ICP went from 300bn FDV to 3bn FDV, despite it being a relatively slightly more sophisticated capital extraction exercise.

But that was also a self-correcting problem.

Without the threat of loss of freedom, adjusting bad actor behaviour is IMO virtually impossible.

But investor/player behaviour is very easy to change. If you lose 10 times you stop playing.

Nobody buys “VC coins” anymore to the point where actually some of them (VERY VERY FEW) have become mispriced. They stopped buying them because they were sick of being farmed."

I think it's true that going full caveat emptor and 'learning through experience' works. But there's tons of collateral damage, and many people might not touch crypto for a long time. On the other hand, we can't rely on the SEC either.

So what could we do?

Balaji had some ideas (https://warpcast.com/balajis.eth/0xfd6ca04d), but not sure how we could test them in the wild.

I understand what is being said here and discussed and I agree with Cobie that it's a self-correcting problem. But for me it is kind of surprising that Sam Sun and others actually try to ostracize people and hold them accountable for scamming. I'm also surprised as for why Chaskin (https://warpcast.com/chaskin.eth/0x13be581d) tries to argue in the same vein.

In my opinion the obvious solution is not to iterate on making meme coins being launched fairer.

Meme coins on its own and the degen nature of the crypto space is what is the problem and so is the framing of everything around flipping coins.

The solution to is not to ostracize some people who are a little bit worse than others. All memecoin launching is a little bit bad, some are terrible.

The solution is to build use cases that actually have meaningful outcomes in the real world. For example social networks, network states and so on.

In fact I have been repeating myself on Kiwi News by saying this and I am actually very surprised that the crypto Twitter people and also Chaskin from the EF now seem to suggest that we have to slightly improve the launching of meme coins when actually we should entirely defocus our efforts on serving the meme coin pipeline. It will anyways continue to exist. We don't need to serve it.

Why do people want to continue to focusing on helping to fix/maintain the memecoin pipeline? This is a waste of our time.

The solution to is not to ostracize some people who are a little bit worse than others. All memecoin launching is a little bit bad, some are terrible.

The solution is to build use cases that actually have meaningful outcomes in the real world. For example social networks, network states and so on.

Great take.

Society has a long history of accepting tech that facilitates crime and extortion.

Banks made money laundering at scale easier. And we still use them.

The Internet made hacking easier. And we still use it.

Social media has been used by ISIS to coordinate terrorists. And we still use it.

We still use all that tech because as a society we accepted the trade-off. We weighed the benefits of the tech and decided that they were more important than the costs of facilitating crime in some edge cases.

So I agree that one of the best ways to get more people to support crypto is to build use cases that will be so useful, that they will take all the spotlight from these crimes. And all these 'gotcha' takes will be seen as reporting on unimportant events on the fringes of real tech that we use every day.

This is a much more elegant description of my very reductionist take which is; "not all memecoins are bad, only the ones the world knows about." which is problematic if we want the world to use crypto.

Yeah, still, for example, last week we went on a posting spree, essentially arguing that we have to uncancel Ethereum in order for the memecoin casino to become irrelevant.

Then over the weekend there was the Milei Libracoin being launched and rugged so fast that even the usual degen gamblers got rugged. Today then they are unhappy with their game having been sped up and so they're complaining about the quickness of rugs and their extractive nature.

But if you've been more sensitive to the quickness of the rug, then this frustration may have arisen for much earlier than has happened for these ultra degen gamblers, who are unhappy just now.

For me, the core question is, why are some of the most influential people on Ethereum, Cobie, Sam, Chaskin etc. talking about ostracizing just a subset of people from memecoin launches? Why aren't they focusing all on building better systems and more meaningful visions?

Why aren't we casting aside memecoins?