Super amped for the @LasoFinance launch on @MetaDAOProject
The early support and trust from the community has been incredible to watch
It’s been a privilege to work alongside @huntermmonk. Hunter is a high-integrity founder building in one of the most important categories in crypto: private, user-owned credit
Excited for the next chapter of Laso and for more high-quality MetaDAO launches ahead
People often ask what makes Silicon Valley culture so special and hard to replicate.
It's not the talent or the capital. There are many places with both.
The secret sauce of Silicon Valley is that it doesn't punish failure. This is rare to the point of being basically unique.
Failure is already its own punishment. Spending years of your life trying to build something that goes nowhere is a deep and unforgiving grief. The time, the energy, the money, the opportunity cost, it's impossible to erase that.
But what SV startup culture strips away is that second layer of punishment: the shame that society stacks on top. The whispers at the next party, that you've embarrassed yourself, that you should have known better. In SV, there's no shame in winding down a startup, it's the mark of having entered the arena and taken a swing.
But then there's stuff like this. This is how it works almost everywhere else in the world. This founder failed, therefore the salary he paid himself is a disgrace (if he did OK, no one would ever bring it up).
Silicon Valley VCs would never post anything like this about a wound down startup. No mention of the founder's background either: Was $200K a paycut for them? Do they live in NYC/SF where $200K is ~$100K take-home? Do they have kids, a mortgage? And come on, no seed-stage company is running out of money because the founder is paying themselves $200K~, seed rounds are in the millions. $200K/yr is like a single engineer's salary. Yeah $200K is on the high side, but really? If you think this founder embezzled from the company, then sue them. If you thought $200K was unconscionable, did you mention that when you invested? Otherwise what is the point of this?
This is why in Silicon Valley (and China and Israel too), startup culture is a gem that's almost impossible to replicate anywhere else in the world. People can't help themselves to rub salt in the wounds of failure, and they don't think about the wider culture reverberations of that attitude.
Base was down for almost two hours today, and the reason is the whole story: one bad block, and nobody else to keep the chain alive.
A single consensus bug sequenced one invalid block, right after block 47806542, and every block after it just stopped. Base runs a single sequencer, so when that one machine choked, the entire network choked with it. no backup producer, no other validators to route around the problem.
The exit was worse. the chain couldn't heal itself: node operators across the ecosystem had to manually restart before syncing recovered. and for those two hours there were no blocks, which means no trades, no liquidations, no withdrawals. if you wanted out, you couldn't, because leaving is also a transaction.
And this isn't the first time. a sequencer handoff failure froze Base for 33 minutes last August, today it was nearly two hours. that's the part the "L2 is a blockchain" pitch skips: a chain with one sequencer isn't decentralized infrastructure that happens to be fast, it's one server with great branding, always one bad block away from a full stop.
The crypto space got everything it wanted except for broad product market fit. The PMF that did occur rarely accrues to coins. I think the potential is there but every time there is recovery the market speed runs to memes and scams, making real adoption more difficult.
jeff was able to bypass this problem by simply being too rich to need to sell equity to investors
most founders dont have this luxury, and it is therefore not a broadly applicable solution
truly one in a million
hyperliquid
the real trillion dollar problem is giving tokens a reason to exist
the current regulatory structure has traditionally restricted value accrual to liquid tokens in lieu of nonliquid private equity
this must change
GRASS is terrible for crypto. Here's why:
- The business is farming user data and selling to AI labs for nearly $100m ARR.
- In return, they give you a memecoin with 0 value accrual
- We have no idea where the revenue goes (assume it lines their pockets until someone shares expense data)
- Team says Grass is an "ownerless foundation" yet there are centralized decisions made all the time
- Andrej says there is no equity even though they raised venture funding (who gets paid if GRASS got acquired?)
This facade lasts until they raise more against equity, they rug the token, or tokenholders get smart and dump this memecoin - don't stick around to see which comes first.