By analogy, Buterin compares C++ with Ethereum, pointing out that C++ would remain the same regardless of whether there was good social philosophy or otherwise.
Vitalik Buterin, a co-founder of Ethereum, argued that “good social philosophy” is needed more for the upper application layer of Ethereum than for the lower infrastructure layer. He stated that apps built on the upper layer are a reflection of the developer’s motives, philosophy, ethics, and worldview. The lower layer is also influenced by these factors, but not as much. This is because the infrastructure layer must be abstract enough to run many apps, which are likely to have diverse motives and worldviews.
Buterin used C++ and Ethereum as an analogy. He explained that C++ would remain the same regardless of whether there was good social philosophy or otherwise. However, with Ethereum, good social ideas, such as environmental concerns, spurred many people to develop Proof of Stake technologies when most people were preoccupied with Proof of Work. He added that the lower layer is about 50% general purpose, whereas the upper app layer is about 80% special purpose. Along these lines, he concluded that your worldview more influences apps and should be the focus of good social philosophy.
When asked about the apps with bad social philosophy, Buterin mentioned FTX, Lunar Terra labs, and pump.fun. He stated that people started out making Polymarket to do interesting things like predict elections, but then they moved on to bigger and better things, using the prediction market to try to improve scientific research. In contrast, Pump. Fun started out launching memecoins and doesn't seem to be progressing any further, merely serving to support the Solana network's rug pulls. Buterin's view is that people who aren't interested in seeing society move toward good goals wouldn't bother making an application at all.
Ethereum's official account on X, formerly Twitter, posed the question of what the network's ethos was and which apps best represented this ethos. However, community support for this idea was limited, with many people expressing annoyance that Ethereum was focusing on philosophy rather than Layer 1 bread-and-butter problems such as scalability, transaction fees, and network speed. The question then becomes, what comes first, philosophy or technology? Many in the community believe that more people will adopt cypherpunk ideas if the technology works well, arguing that people care more about network performance and adoption than the social implications of the applications.
Buterin's examples highlight how different philosophies can impact crypto projects. Polymarket began with interesting endeavors like predicting elections, which aligns with the broader goal of using technology for societal advancement. In contrast, Pump. Fun's activities, such as launching memecoins and supporting rug pulls, appear to prioritize short-term gains and exploit emerging trends, ultimately contributing to a chaotic and exploitative ecosystem.
As memecoins on Solana's network faced difficulties, the platform faced backlash and community members began shutting down the project. This chaotic scenario unfolded as people engaged in degrading stunts, which were live-streamed on platforms like Twitch. But one could say the same about Ethereum at one point, at least in the sense that it had the most Ponzi schemes in the crypto market. But an Ethereum-based Ponzi token would be on the app layer, thus proving Buterin's point that the app layer is most vulnerable to the developer's worldview and social philosophy.
