MetaMask 聯合創始人 Dan Finlay 對 Memecoin 的實驗凸顯了關於共識及其投機性質的爭論

MetaMask 聯合創始人 Dan Finlay 對 memecoin 進行了一項實驗，引發了關於 Web3 和 AI 同意的爭論。這就是出現的情況。

MetaMask co-founder Dan Finlay conducted an experiment with memecoins that highlighted debates on consensus and speculation.

MetaMask 聯合創始人 Dan Finlay 進行了一項模因幣實驗，強調了關於共識和猜測的爭論。

The experiment involved minting two tokens, “Consent” on Ethereum and “I Don’t Consent” on Solana, and observing the reactions and participation.

該實驗涉及鑄造兩種代幣，即以太坊上的“同意”和 Solana 上的“我不同意”，並觀察反應和參與。

Finlay aimed to explore the boundaries of consent, trust, and responsibility in the web3 domain, particularly in the realm of memecoins and decentralized decision-making.

Finlay 旨在探索 web3 領域中同意、信任和責任的界限，特別是在迷因幣和去中心化決策領域。

Participants were enthusiastic about the tokens, with the value briefly exceeding $100,000 for “Consent.” However, this positioned participants for potential financial losses.

參與者對這些代幣熱情高漲，「同意」的價值一度超過 10 萬美元。然而，這使參與者面臨潛在的經濟損失。

The experiment sparked discussion on the speculative nature of memecoins and the risks involved for participants who may not fully grasp the nature of the assets they're purchasing.

該實驗引發了關於模因幣的投機性質以及可能無法完全掌握所購買資產性質的參與者所涉及的風險的討論。

Finlay encountered backlash from investors, including threats and inquiries about long-term plans for the assets, despite their simplistic design and lack of intrinsic value.

芬利遭到了投資者的強烈反對，包括對資產長期計畫的威脅和詢問，儘管這些資產的設計過於簡單且缺乏內在價值。

“The only act of consent that seems unequivocal in this memecoin environment is that buyers are definitely agreeing to put their money into something. But without this thing being well defined, what kind of consent is it?”, Finlay noted.

「在這種迷因幣環境中，唯一看似明確的同意行為是買家肯定同意將錢投入某物。但如果沒有明確定義這件事，那它是什麼樣的同意呢？

While the experiment highlighted the consensus aspect of memecoins, it also brought to light their speculative nature, making meme cryptos inherently risky.

雖然該實驗強調了模因幣的共識方面，但它也暴露了它們的投機性質，使模因加密貨幣具有固有的風險。

Finlay personally experienced how crypto liquidity is often tied to speculation, which isn't always beneficial. Memecoins thrive on extreme volatility, often influenced by social media trends rather than utility or value.

芬利親身經歷了加密貨幣流動性如何常常與投機聯繫在一起，而投機並不總是有益的。 Memecoin 在極端波動性下蓬勃發展，通常受到社群媒體趨勢而非效用或價值的影響。

The speculative aspect makes memecoins susceptible to market manipulation, such as pump-and-dump schemes, where investors risk losing if prices crash after the hype fades.

投機性使得迷因幣容易受到市場操縱的影響，例如拉高拋售計劃，如果炒作消退後價格暴跌，投資者就有遭受損失的風險。

Finlay's experiment and observations underscored the need for clear systems of consent, trust, and responsibility, considering the blurring lines between public visibility, user expectations, and collective decision-making.

考慮到公眾知名度、使用者期望和集體決策之間的模糊界限，芬利的實驗和觀察強調了建立明確的同意、信任和責任體系的必要性。

In his experiment, Finlay also drew parallels between memecoin consensus and consent in digital platforms integrating AI, such as Bluesky.

在他的實驗中，芬利還將 memecoin 共識與整合人工智慧的數位平台（例如 Bluesky）中的同意進行了比較。

Finlay noted how Bluensky utilized a public post data set for AI training without explicit user consent, highlighting a disconnect between the protocol's and society's consensus expectations.

Finlay 指出 Bluensky 如何在未經用戶明確同意的情況下利用公共發布資料集進行人工智慧訓練，這凸顯了該協議與社會共識期望之間的脫節。

Recently, the memecoins sector was analyzed precisely because they too are riding the bullish wave following Donald Trump's victory in the USA 2024 presidential elections.

最近，模因幣行業受到了分析，因為在唐納德·特朗普 (Donald Trump) 贏得 2024 年美國總統大選後，模因幣行業也迎來了看漲浪潮。

First of all, the memecoins of the moment were analyzed, with an exception for Dogecoin (DOGE), which is the meme crypto par excellence. And then Bonk emerged, the meme crypto on Solana, and PEPE.

首先，分析了當前的迷因幣，但狗狗幣（DOGE）除外，它是卓越的迷因加密貨幣。然後 Bonk 出現了，Solana 上的 meme 加密貨幣和 PEPE。

In any case, it was also noted here the high attention that must be paid to these crypto which are simply the representation of high-risk speculations. In fact, often their market performances are due to real pump&dump schemes that always end in a crash.

無論如何，這裡也指出必須高度關注這些加密貨幣，它們只是高風險投機的代表。事實上，它們的市場表現往往是由於真正的拉高拋售計劃而導致的，而​​這些計劃總是以崩盤告終。

These schemes create real speculative bubbles around these simple assets, which are fundamentally based on nothing useful. When the bubble then bursts, the harsh truth arrives, which is why investors can no longer remain unaware of this high risk of their investments.

這些計劃圍繞著這些簡單的資產創造了真正的投機泡沫，而這些資產基本上沒有什麼用處。當泡沫破裂時，嚴酷的事實就會到來，這就是為什麼投資者不能再對投資的高風險視而不見。