Opinion: Does DeSci need Meme Coin?

Author: NingNing

Does DeSci need MeMe coins? Does MeMe coins need DeSci? Can DeSci really become a disruptive innovation like DeFi?

During this period, I have been lurking in the unconscious abyss of on-chain PVP, observing the interpretation and development of DeSci narratives in the phenomenal world for a long time:

From http://Pump.fun imitation plate Pump Science launching longevity drugs $RIF $URO meme coins for on-chain PK, to @0xAA_Science triggering the Scihub-related memecoin attention war, to Bio Protocol, Vita DAO, ResearchHub and other OG DeSci projects, and finally today when the market thought that the DeSci narrative would become a thing of the past, Andrew Kang made a call and invented a narrative: 2024 DeSci = 2019 DeFi.

"Open source scientific papers" and "reshaping the scientific research paradigm" and other Fantastic new narratives have made some people across the scientific research community and the crypto community visibly excited. For those of us who have been immersed in left-wing ideology for many years without knowing it, MeMe coin, which has positive externalities, is full of justice.

But the question is, does MeMe coin really need positive externalities like DeSci? I agree with Toly and Crypto Wei's point of view. MeMe coin does not need positive externalities. Its first nature is the cyber lottery of the 2020s, which is to sell extreme volatility to young people who fantasize about getting rich overnight, and give young P players born in the Z era a chance to participate in wealth distribution.

Giving a lottery ticket a high-end value and meaning is the practice of China's sports lottery and welfare lottery. Doing so will eventually attract many naive people who don't know the truth to pay IQ tax, making the director (dealer)'s pockets fatter, and there is no real positive externality.

But another fact is that meme coin trading is a typical attention tokenization market, and therefore obeys the laws of communication. A good narrative (whether it is a positive externality narrative or a cult culture) is a good social media meme virus. From this perspective, DeSci is not bad, and it is a kind of honor market collusion.

So, does DeSci need meme coins? To be more precise, does DeSci need the sudden wealth effect and market attention brought by meme coins? The answer is yes.

As an unpopular track, although there are endorsements and investments from institutions such as Coinbase, Binance, Pfizer, and Brain Armstrong, CZ, and Vitalik, the DeSci project has always been regarded by the market as a social currency (pretending to be cool) in the big guys' circle, and is not favored and configured by mainstream market funds (does anyone still remember the ReFi narrative that Celo made in the last cycle?).

Finally, can DeSci really become a disruptive innovation like DeFi? There is a little hope. Here I would like to quote Popper's philosophy of science. Science is not only about truth, but also about power. It is also a kind of religious power of the scientific community, which pays special attention to the tradition and the lineage of learning.

Whether it is scientific research DAO, Pump Science, or the pirate-style raids mentioned in Toly's tweet, they are all trying to challenge and innovate the existing power structure of the scientific community through new organizational methods, new fundraising and donation paradigms, and new ways of collaboration.

Although it is just a spark, it can give people warmth and hope on a cold winter night.

But to be honest, DeSci does not have the same high financial attributes as DeFi. It lacks the two powerful tools of composability (Lego stacking) and circular leverage. It is difficult for DeSci to create 100 billion-level new assets out of thin air like DeFi did in the past.