From what I know about him he is one of the people who would not want to be that. He certainly has the opportunity to do so if he chooses though.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
From what I know about him he is one of the people who would not want to be that. He certainly has the opportunity to do so if he chooses though.
Ohad is cool as hell! If you talk to him, he is a very down to earth person, but I believe that he is the perfect type of person to represent crypto. Doesn't talk over people's heads.
I communicate with him daily so I know. But he does not seem interested in being a representative or politician.
but that is PRECISELY why he would make a great representative for the PEOPLE :)
the reluctant leaders are the best
Not if coercion is involved. I think also there is a difference between celebrity and leader. Celebrities lead from the front and are seen as "role models" but are not necessarily leaders. In the decentralized space I don't see a benefit for central authority figures that we commonly recognize as leaders, unless it is thought leadership. In terms of thought leadership Ohad is already a thought leader, so is Dan Larimer, Vitalik Buterin and many others, but it is possible to be a thought leader without being a celebrity or even having a fixed identity.
"Celebrities lead from the front and are seen as "role models" but are not necessarily leaders."
I think there is a paradox in this existence which the celebrity involvement in "elections" causes people to have problems with.
If a celebrity can be seen as a "role model" and "lead from the front" without the long term responsibilities that come with "leadership", then they get to have the "influence" of "leaders" without having to worry about their reputations necessarily being harmed...
"Code is law" turned into "It was just a test" because he is a "celebrity" and not a "leader"...
now, I don't have a problem with the latter statement, but the issue now becomes he has completely contradicted himself and seemingly gained credibility along the way...THAT seems to have some negative consequences if this is extrapolated beyond one person...
If people are not responsible for how they use their influence, you might have people investing 160 million into something off a reputation that completely goes belly up over-night...
Wait...
Celebrities are likely to become President in the USA. Trump and Reagan for example were celebrities who became President. I think when it comes to reputation there are different areas or spheres. Someone's personal life doesn't give me any indication on what quality code they can produce or what sort of decisions they can make in their professional life. People often have social problems or personal problems but are geniuses. Celebrity culture puts the personal life front and center.