[arciini]

I think this is actually a pretty balanced and rational take on crypto. There's a lot to be jaded by in the industry, and I'm glad he got a lot out of the experience (attending the conference, meeting people, including other skeptics) despite not continuing on the startup. I think at the start of our careers, it's generally a good instinct to just try things and see if they're for you.

> By the way, we didn't plan doing that at the end, after thinking about it a lot, but it meant we would need to gain many users by having a killer product and work for free for very long, like a regular startup I'd say.

Real web3 startups are just like normal startups if you take out the token economics. There do exist use-cases and users, but I'm glad the author had a strong enough sense to do what he felt was right. It's definitely easier now that the bandwagon has mostly stopped, but I think his reaction is a good one to maintain throughout our careers.

[dumbfounder]

I am a web3 startup founder, and we had to push back a lot on investors in the early days around the pressure to release a token. We raised money on a SAFE with warrants for a token should we decide to issue one. I think many others weren't experienced enough to know they could (and should) push back on investors for things they believe in. All that said, we still think issuing a token could be the right move for us, but we won't do it until we understand exactly what we are getting into, and believe that it is the right thing for the protocol we are building. Anything less is just a get-rich-quick scheme. Founders should focus way more on the value they want to create and not the way they create a return for investors. But it's doubly tough in this industry to do so with so many waving money in your face that only really care about the fact that crypto gives you an incredibly short path to liquidity.