Author: Jocy, Founder of IOSG Ventures

Part 1: Who Stays? More Importantly, Why Stay

Last year, I wrote a tweet about the talent flow between AI and crypto, and someone commented: it's great that talented people are going into AI to help build an inevitable future.

However, a recent podcast conversation made me realize that this judgment is not deep enough. The question is not just "who stays," but more fundamentally, "why stay" and "can the ecosystem support a revolution after staying." Only those who remain in the industry to continue building after experiencing bull and bear markets, failures, and the friction between reality and ideals are likely to lead the revolution in the crypto space.

In the past few months, I have talked to many crypto entrepreneurs from 2023 to 2025. Many Chinese teams raised only five to seven million dollars around 2023, and in the current environment, it is difficult to secure the next round of funding. This runway has just lasted a little over two years, and they are now struggling to go live on exchanges. Countless airdrops and distributed tokens have flooded the market, causing token prices to plummet. The answers given by entrepreneurs are tokens on the verge of zero, a loss of reputation in the crypto industry, and then they turn to leave.

Looking back at Asia, there are fewer and fewer investors willing to support early-stage entrepreneurs. Without investor support, there are no steadfast entrepreneurs willing to step back into the crypto industry, and the entire industry ecosystem cannot progress—how can the crypto war between China and the U.S. compete?

In April last year, I wrote a tweet mentioning that a core team from a portfolio started working on AI applications, and the most reputable talents in the industry are leaving. Until today, more and more people are making this choice, which is not a coincidence; it reflects a more systemic issue: after making money, Chinese and American crypto OGs have chosen completely different paths.

Part 2: How American OGs "Support the Cathedral"

What do American crypto OGs think about after making money?

Brian Armstrong took Coinbase public, becoming the first mainstream crypto exchange in the U.S., and founded Research Hub, attempting to fundamentally change the incentive mechanisms of scientific research. This is not just simple donations; it is about reconstructing the entire knowledge production system.

Naval Ravikant, as an early Bitcoin philosopher, not only promoted ICOs through AngelList and used Bitcoin as a global crowdfunding tool but also incubated CoinList to provide a compliance framework for token issuance and funded the Zcash team. His thoughts on currency, crypto-economics, and decentralization have profoundly influenced the entire industry.

Chris Dixon led the Series B round for Coinbase in 2013, becoming the first mainstream VC to fully bet on crypto. He grew a16z crypto from $300 million in 2018 to over $7 billion, not only investing in projects but also establishing a crypto school to systematically cultivate industry talent.

Dan Robinson at Paradigm is not just an investor but also a builder. He participated in the early development of Uniswap, co-authored Uniswap V3, promoted the development of modern MEV auction models during the early stages of Flashbots, and led the seed round for Optimism. This deep technical involvement and intellectual output are what true ecosystem building looks like.

Michael Saylor transformed MicroStrategy into a strategy firm, holding $67 billion worth of Bitcoin (over 3% of the total circulating supply), continuously accumulating through innovative financing methods like issuing stocks and low-interest bonds, becoming a symbolic figure for Bitcoin institutionalization.

Barry Silbert founded DCG and launched the GBTC Grayscale Bitcoin Trust, becoming a major channel for traditional investors to gain exposure to Bitcoin, with Genesis Trading and CoinDesk becoming industry infrastructure.

Chainlink founder Sergey Nazarov, who worked as a software engineer at Google, invented a decentralized oracle network in 2017, which has supported over $7 trillion in transaction volume. Having achieved financial freedom through multiple bull and bear cycles, he still actively promotes the Chainlink standard in places like Hong Kong, aiming to unify DeFi and traditional finance through CRE and build a global "internet contract" ecosystem.

Rune Christensen sold his English teacher recruitment business in China after encountering Bitcoin in 2011 and fully invested in crypto. In 2015, he founded MakerDAO and launched the decentralized stablecoin DAI, becoming one of the first and largest DeFi protocols on Ethereum. For over a decade, he has been at the forefront of DeFi governance, recently rebranding the MKR brand to Sky and launching the Spark protocol to integrate DAI with U.S. Treasury bonds, becoming a pioneer in the fusion of crypto and traditional finance.

Arthur Hayes founded BitMEX and introduced perpetual contracts, bringing traditional financial derivatives into the crypto market, with the funding rate mechanism becoming an industry standard. After being fined for violating bank secrecy laws in 2022 and receiving a pardon from Trump, he co-founded the Ethena stablecoin protocol with Guy. Over the past few years, Arthur has continuously shared his crypto insights with the industry without pause.

What do these individuals have in common? After making money, they think not about how to exit but about how to attract the best talent, how to create world-changing applications, and how to build a systematic ecosystem to support it. They are not just investors; they are builders, thought leaders, and contributors to public goods.

Part 3: Systemic Dilemma of Chinese Crypto OGs

In contrast, the fundamental differences in the policy environment in the Chinese crypto space limit long-term investment opportunities, and most OGs choose to exit rather than give back after early successes and some wealth accumulation.

The lack of historical narrative. From the beginning, American crypto has had a grand narrative of "changing the world," and the tradition of public goods construction that dates back to the Carnegie and Rockefeller eras has continued in the crypto field. China's cultural accumulation in this regard is relatively weak.

We lack a systematic talent cultivation mechanism (compared to the U.S. crypto schools), lack long-term investment in crypto talent and infrastructure (compared to projects like YC/AllianceDao, Research Hub), and lack continuous intellectual output and industry discourse power (compared to Paradigm's research-driven approach and Naval's philosophical influence).

This is not a personal moral issue but a systemic problem caused by the lack of historical narrative, policy uncertainty, cultural genetic differences, and other factors.

What does this difference lead to?

Many entrepreneurs and developers aim not just to get rich; they want to create world-changing applications and leave a mark in history that is recognized. All the best talents, if they observe carefully, will not return.

When Web3 is simplified into a big casino, and the mainstream narrative of the industry degenerates from "changing the world" to a purely wealth game, the best talents will vote with their feet. It is not that they do not want to make money, but they want to make "meaningful money"—to gain returns through value creation, not by harvesting others in a zero-sum game.

When everyone in the environment stops pursuing true ideals and values, these people will leave. Narratives are not empty; they directly affect the talent structure. When an industry cannot provide a compelling vision and value recognition, no amount of financial incentives can retain those value-driven talents.

What we see now is a vicious cycle:

Lack of new value creation → The market can only compete within existing stock → Stock competition reinforces speculative mentality → Drives away those who want to innovate incrementally → Less value creation → The market becomes more reliant on stock competition

This is a microcosm of the speculative era in the Chinese crypto space.

Part 4: Even Under Constraints, A Spark Can Ignite a Prairie Fire

Some may say: the environment is different, and comparisons cannot be made simply. This is true. I am not asking Chinese OGs to do exactly what American OGs do.

Others may say: even if they want to do something, they can't do much, so why bother. But I believe that even in a constrained environment, supporting open-source developers, organizing technical community events, and investing in early-stage tech teams—these small initiatives still hold significance. Systematic efforts can produce a compound effect.

Some may also say: overemphasizing idealism is hypocritical; crypto is about financial innovation. But this is not an either-or choice. A healthy ecosystem needs a sufficient proportion of value-driven individuals. If it is entirely dominated by purely financial-driven people, it will fall into a zero-sum game in the long run, ultimately harming everyone's interests. This is not moral preaching but enlightened self-interest.

IOSG's past investors include exchanges, miners, early crypto OGs, and traditional funds. I believe many Chinese OGs are idealistic and heroic, willing to push the industry forward. It is precisely under such difficult circumstances in the crypto industry, especially in China, that they are still willing to continue supporting and helping this industry.

A spark can ignite a prairie fire. We can also build a robust positive feedback ecosystem in crypto, as strong as that in the U.S.

Part 5: The Cathedral and the Casino: Buffett's Warning

Warren Buffett uses this metaphor to describe American capitalism: In the next hundred years, make sure that the cathedral is not overtaken by the casino. This metaphor also applies to the crypto market:

Cryptocurrencies and blockchain have achieved unprecedented success. They form a magnificent cathedral that has created an economic system never seen before in the world. At the same time, there is a huge casino next to it.

The temptation is enormous, especially now, the temptation is to walk into that casino. In the casino, everyone is having a great time, money flows frequently, but you must also ensure that the cathedral is supported.

In the next hundred years, crypto must ensure that this cathedral is not overtaken by the casino.

The cathedral of Bitcoin and Ethereum remains magnificent, while the grand casino of certain exchanges revels every night. However, if the prosperity of the casino does not benefit the cathedral, that building, which creates real value, will gradually fall into disrepair, and ultimately the entire ecosystem will lose its foundation.

What Brian Armstrong, Vitalik, and Chris Dixon are doing is essentially supporting the cathedral. They ensure that the prosperity of the casino does not consume that cathedral.

# Part 6: The Only Path of Long-Termism

Returning to my judgment from a few months ago, it now requires a deeper understanding:

Those who remain after experiencing bull and bear markets indeed have the potential to lead the revolution, but simply "staying" is not enough. More importantly, it is about "why stay" and "whether the ecosystem can support the revolution."

Revolution requires the support of the entire ecosystem. The continuous development of crypto in the U.S. is not because people can endure more, but because a systematic feedback mechanism has been established, allowing the ecosystem to self-renew and self-evolve.

As an institutional investor, IOSG will continue to actively take on the responsibility of change:

• Systematically invest in more early-stage startup teams, even if short-term returns are not obvious.

• IOSG EIR will support and fund more entrepreneurs currently facing financing difficulties, establishing a stronger talent cultivation mechanism.

• Continuously output and share frontline industry research and insights.

• Focus on long-term value creation rather than short-term speculation in project investment choices.

We need to redefine success. Wealth transfer in a zero-sum game vs. wealth creation in the process of creating real value; the numbers may be the same, but the meanings are completely different.

If Chinese crypto institutions and capable participants can make breakthroughs in the feedback mechanism, they may become a key force in changing the ecosystem. This is not only a moral responsibility but also a rational choice for long-term interests—only a healthy ecosystem can incubate great projects, attract outstanding talent, and create sustainable value.

This is true long-termism and the only path to ensure that the cathedral is not overtaken by the casino.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。