以太坊會因其意識形態而失敗嗎？

最近，在社群媒體平台 X 上的一系列激烈交流中，加密貨幣交易巨頭 Wintermute 的創始人兼執行長 Evgeny Gaevoy 引發了一場引人注目的爭論

A recent flurry of heated exchanges on social media platform X saw Evgeny Gaevoy, the founder and CEO of crypto trading powerhouse Wintermute, sparking a notable debate about the future of Ethereum and its leadership.

最近，加密貨幣交易巨頭 Wintermute 的創始人兼首席執行官 Evgeny Gaevoy 在社交媒體平台 X 上發生了一系列激烈的交流，引發了關於以太坊未來及其領導地位的引人注目的辯論。

In a pointed critique, Gaevoy suggested that potential failures in Ethereum would not stem from technological competition like Solana, but rather from ideological contradictions within its own leadership.

Gaevoy 在尖銳的批評中表示，以太坊的潛在失敗不會像 Solana 那樣源自於技術競爭，而是源自於其領導層內部的意識形態矛盾。

Gaevoy's remarks followed comments from Hayden Adams, known for his pioneering work on the Uniswap protocol, who had earlier expressed his tolerance and perceived value in meme-centric cryptocurrencies, emphasizing their role in promoting social causes.

Gaevoy 在發表此番言論之前，海登·亞當斯(Hayden Adams) 因在Uniswap 協議方面的開創性工作而聞名，他早些時候曾表達過對以meme 為中心的加密貨幣的容忍和感知價值，強調其在促進社會事業方面的作用。

“I think there’s value to memetic attention and it’s cool to create markets for it. That said, the underlying purpose and value of the tech goes way beyond financial games,” he stated.

「我認為模因關注是有價值的，為其創造市場很酷。也就是說，該技術的根本目的和價值遠遠超出了金融遊戲，」他表示。

Contrasting with Adams, Gaevoy argued, “Blockchain tech is impressively super well conductive to create purely capitalist incentive-based systems. At the same time, Vitalik [Buterin], Hayden [Adams] and many others are trying to ‘solve capitalism’ […] You are either building capitalism or planned socialism. I'm sorry, you really can’t have both.”

與亞當斯相比，蓋沃伊認為，「區塊鏈技術對於創建純粹基於資本主義激勵的系統具有令人印象深刻的超級好作用。與此同時，Vitalik [Buterin]、Hayden [Adams] 和許多其他人正在嘗試「解決資本主義」[...] 你要么正在建立資本主義，要么正在計劃社會主義。抱歉，你真的不能兩者兼得。

He added that he’ll choose “capitalism in all its (often ugly!) glory. And if you are not here for glory, then one simple argument is – unlike socialism, capitalism actually works.”

他補充說，他將選擇「資本主義的所有（通常是醜陋的！）榮耀。如果你來這裡不是為了榮耀，那麼一個簡單的論點就是——與社會主義不同，資本主義實際上是有效的。

This notion sparked a broader dialogue within the crypto community, attracting comments from other industry leaders. Ari Paul, CEO of BlockTower Capital, entered the debate suggesting Gaevoy's view represented a “false dichotomy.”

這個概念引發了加密貨幣社群內更廣泛的對話，吸引了其他行業領導者的評論。 BlockTower Capital 執行長 Ari Paul 參與了辯論，暗示蓋沃伊的觀點代表了「錯誤的二分法」。

Paul analogized the situation to societal norms about propriety in shared spaces, such as elevators, arguing that just because one advocates for polite behavior does not mean they reject other priorities like safety or efficiency.

保羅將這種情況與有關電梯等共享空間禮儀的社會規範進行了類比，他認為，僅僅因為一個人提倡禮貌行為，並不意味著他們拒絕安全或效率等其他優先事項。

Gaevoy rebutted, emphasizing that the core functionality should trump less critical social preferences. He responded to Paul with a metaphor about optimizing elevators, “So the best elevators are the ones that don’t have farting people in them?” suggesting that focusing on minor issues like elevator etiquette over more significant technical characteristics could be misplaced.

Gaevoy 反駁道，強調核心功能應該勝過不太重要的社會偏好。他用一個關於優化電梯的比喻來回應保羅，“那麼最好的電梯就是那些裡面沒有放屁的人的電梯？”這表明，關注電梯禮儀等次要問題而不是更重要的技術特徵可能是錯誤的。

Fiskantes, co-founder of Zee Prime Capital, elaborated on this metaphor, distinguishing between expressing a preference and redesigning systems around niche issues. He argued that stating a preference against sharing an elevator with a ‘farting person’ is vastly different from redesigning the elevator to specifically include anti-fart features, potentially at the expense of more critical functionalities like safety and speed.

Zee Prime Capital 聯合創始人 Fiskantes 詳細闡述了這個比喻，區分了表達偏好和圍繞利基問題重新設計系統。他認為，反對與「放屁的人」共用電梯與重新設計電梯以專門包括防放屁功能有很大不同，這可能會犧牲安全和速度等更關鍵的功能。

Furthering the discourse, Mike van Rossum of Folkvant Trading defended the intentions of Ethereum's leaders. He highlighted that Adams and Buterin's critiques were not against capitalism per se but against trends within the crypto space that may not be sustainable or conducive to long-term progress.

為了進一步推動這一討論，Folkvant Trading 的 Mike van Rossum 為以太坊領導人的意圖進行了辯護。他強調，亞當斯和 Buterin 的批評並不是反對資本主義本身，而是反對加密貨幣領域內的趨勢，這些趨勢可能無法持續或不利於長期進步。

Van Rossum explained, “They both have a certain vision of crypto […] they just want to say ‘I don’t like this’, and that’s pretty much all they did,” suggesting a nuanced view that accommodates both capitalist frameworks and selective ideological stances.

Van Rossum 解釋說，「他們都對加密貨幣有一定的願景……他們只是想說『我不喜歡這個』，而這幾乎就是他們所做的一切，」這提出了一種微妙的觀點，既適應了資本主義框架，也適應了選擇性意識形態立場。

Gaevoy concluded the debate by clarifying his stance on the foundational principles of crypto projects. He stressed the importance of adopting capitalism not merely as an afterthought but as a central guiding principle.

Gaevoy 透過澄清他對加密項目基本原則的立場來結束辯論。他強調採用資本主義不僅是事後的想法，也是中心指導原則的重要性。

He asserted, “If your key guiding principle is capitalism and then you make extra steps to make it less damaging – I’m all for it. If your guiding principle is, idk, ‘social justice’ or ‘only good things should be built’ and then you attach capitalism as an afterthought, that’s what I am against.”

他斷言，「如果你的主要指導原則是資本主義，然後你採取額外的措施來減少它的破壞性——我完全贊成。如果你的指導原則是，我不知道，‘社會正義’或‘只應該建造美好的事物’，然後你把資本主義視為事後的想法，那就是我反對的。

The debate underscores a critical junction for the crypto community, reflecting a broader ideological struggle about the direction and use of blockchain technology. As these discussions continue to unfold, they not only influence public perception but also shape the strategic decisions that will determine the future of Ethereum and similar blockchains.

這場辯論強調了加密社群的關鍵結合點，反映了關於區塊鏈技術的方向和使用的更廣泛的意識形態鬥爭。隨著這些討論的不斷展開，它們不僅會影響公眾的看法，還會影響決定以太坊和類似區塊鏈未來的策略決策。

At press time, ETH trades at $3,682.

截至發稿時，ETH 交易價格為 3,682 美元。