Today, the title I gave this article is purely meant for fun.
The reason is that recently the crypto ecosystem has once again sounded a lament of despair without any real cause.
The trigger was the announcement of Sam Blackshear, the CTO of Mysten Labs, which backs the SUI public chain, leaving to join Anthropic.
Interestingly, I have never been optimistic about the SUI public chain (in fact, I have little interest in mentioning it in my article), while I have publicly expressed my optimism about Anthropic.
So here, as an unknown figure, I sincerely congratulate this CTO for finding a career and a company worth his effort.
In my view, this is entirely a matter for celebration, both for the crypto industry and for AI.
The AI industry is worth celebrating, and there is no need to elaborate.
The reason the crypto industry is also worth celebrating is that talents like him won’t be wasted on such meaningless projects anymore. These kinds of projects should be cleared away during this bear market. This will benefit the future of the crypto industry with no downsides.
However, the sentiments of many media outlets differ greatly from my own.
In their reports on this news, the most commendable contribution of Sam Blackshear is said to be the invention of the MOVE programming language. Those who can invent programming languages are generally big names. Thus, the media laments that such a rare talent has turned to AI, which is a significant loss for the crypto ecosystem, and subsequently presented the conclusion that has been lamented many times:
The crypto ecosystem is doomed.
First, I fully agree that “those who can invent programming languages are generally big names.” Therefore, from a technical standpoint, Sam is undoubtedly a rare talent.
But next, I would like to share another perspective; for talents, there are things worth doing and things not worth doing.
In this regard, three senior masters have provided answers coincidentally:
Mr. Yang Zhenning emphasized during his lifetime in a public speech that there must be “taste” in scientific research.
Mr. Chen Shengshen stated during his lifetime that the question of “what is good mathematics and what is not good or somewhat good mathematics” is very important. “Choosing a good mathematical research direction is crucial.”
Mr. Qiu Chengtong has explicitly discussed the importance of “taste” in scientific research. In a book titled "Face to Face with Mathematical Masters," there is a chapter named "Cultivating Interest and Taste - An Interview with Qiu Chengtong" where his views on taste are discussed.
The message expressed by these three seniors is clear:
That is, talents must find the most critical and worthy problems to strive and delve into, rather than wasting precious time and energy on insignificant matters.
Having confirmed that Ethereum pursues decentralization as an uncompromising goal while other layer one smart contract public chains sacrifice decentralization for efficiency, I no longer consider any other layer one smart contract public chains.
Thus, I believe that continuing to invest massive amounts of time, energy, and financial resources into developing a layer one public chain that sacrifices decentralization for efficiency is ultimately futile, and such work and such projects are tasteless.
Unfortunately, SUI is one of many such projects.
It is a pity that talents like Sam have wasted precious time and energy on such projects over the years. Even doing zero-knowledge proofs or fully homomorphic encryption would be a better use of his talents than working on this tasteless layer one contract public chain.
Leaving SUI for Anthropic is stepping onto the right path for him.
As for the laments like “the crypto ecosystem is doomed,” I have already refuted this many times, and I didn't want to waste time again. However, since Sam, who left, is a technical expert, the media's feelings about him seem different from others. Thus, I will share my personal views from the perspective of talent.
If we use 1, 10, 100, and 1000 to metaphorically describe the stages and degree of development in any industry, it is always the figure represented by “1” that is the truly indispensable and irreplaceable pillar. While the zeros behind it are important, they do not play a critical role.
What is “1”?
It is the leader, the one who can see through the essence of the industry, discern the future direction, grasp the core of the issues, and lead everyone through hardships, forging ahead as a pioneer.
And what about “0”?
They are merely the countless crowds following behind the leader.
If there is no “1,” the industry will perish. But as long as that “1” is present, the “0”s may temporarily scatter and leave, but that's not a problem because the “0”s will eventually reappear—like during the next bull market, when the next “narrative” arises, or the next “hot opportunity” blows up...
At that time, those “0”s will once again swarm in uninvited, following that “1” again.
It is merely a matter of time.
And regarding the issue of time, we just need to be patient.
For the crypto ecosystem, talents like Sam are certainly technical big names, but he is merely one of the “0”s and cannot be considered a leader, not that “1.”
Therefore, his departure is indeed a loss for the crypto ecosystem, but it is far from significant enough to affect the development and future of the crypto ecosystem.
To observe the development and future of the crypto ecosystem, we only need to focus on whether the “1” in the ecosystem is still present.
What I see is precisely that those “1”s are not only still here but are also working harder and more diligently.
Therefore, where does the lament of “the crypto ecosystem is doomed” come from?
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。
