Oct. 13, 2021: DeFi 2.0 📈✌️

Influencers debate the generational cutoff between protocols

The chattering class has taken to discussing “DeFi 2.0” lately. As much as we didn’t want to bite, it provides enough fodder for our self-imposed deadline.

What is the start of this meme? When in doubt, credit the couch.

Somewhere along the way, “gen 2 of defi” turned into “DeFi 2.0” in the way that early technological coinages tend to evolve:

  • “phlogiston” ➡️ oxygen

  • “picture show” ➡️ movie

  • “penny farthing” ➡️ bicycle

  • “information superhighway” ➡️ internet

  • “hentai” ➡️ @DegenSpartan’s feed

The concept dates back over 6 months ago but it took a while to get adoption. Since then Maker tried to push a DeFi 2.0 narrative around a collaboration in April that didn’t really stick.

It’s only in the past few days where the “DeFi 2.0” meme has really picked up. Part of this is due to the fact that it’s been heavily pushed by the influential OHM community.

إن شاء الله

Over the past several months OHM-ies have brushed off countless Ponzi accusations by stunningly outperforming the naysayers. Rather than idling about paradise growing fat off their earnings, they instead worked hard at launching Olympus Pro earlier this month to help protocols secure liquidity. This thread describes it quite well.

The program is off to a strong start.

It’s easy to see how Olympus Pro benefits from a definition of DeFi 2.0 in terms of protocol owned assets, which looks to be the most widely accepted definition.

Now, the internet being what it is, everybody has their own opinions on what constitutes DeFi 2.0, some of which are different from the aforementioned. People of course will draw up their own dividing lines, or even debate whether such a distinction exists and is meaningful.

The existence of so many thoughtful frameworks from intelligent users who understand cryptocurrency is what makes Twitter so entertaining and difficult to ignore. Of course, the same can be said of a car wreck.

With a kajillion new opinions, be extremely wary of “thought leaders” articulating frameworks that serve as backdoor attempts to pump their own bags. To avoid being fooled by the seductive power of such reductive thinking, a good rule of thumb is default to the builders.

For builders who spend their days creating and shipping products, semantics don’t matter as much as execution. Creators often have a good sense of when to ignore useless jabbering. Creators also tend to be privy to superior insights derived from struggling with the code trying to force it to submit to their will.

Granted, the best entrepreneurs nowadays are the builders who also are very good at marketing their own creations. In other words, they might come up with their own definitions and frameworks that suit their own interests. Didn’t you just say to be wary of such people?

Well, like it or not, DeFi developers are the people who happen to be responsible for shaping the reality that 95% of “CT influencers” will be ultimately be debating and living within. Ergo, even if their opinion is biased, it’s the only one worth anything.

Therefore we suggest this lengthy thread by Alchemix Founder @scupytrooples, who returned from the future to settle the debate:

Fortunately for my bags, this includes a lengthy breakdown of Curve and Convex.

Wait a second, didn’t you just caution against people pumping their own bags and then create a framework that pumps your own bags?!?!?!?


Read Disclaimers. In addition to being a CRV/CVX maxi, author has a stake in $ALCX and $OHM to make this whole piece even more scuzzy.