Opinion: Token distribution and transparency, jurisdiction and developers may define the credible neutrality of BTC and ETH

CoinRank News: David Marcus, former head of Facebooks stablecoin project, published an article on the X platform to refute 1confirmation founder Nick Tomainos view that ETH is by no means neutral. In response, Nick Tomaino said that credible neutrality can be defined from three aspects: 1. Token allocation and transparency: BTCs internal allocation is 0%. 1. Anyone can participate as a PoW miner and it is completely transparent. ETH has an internal allocation of 10%, and PoW mining was also used before. Solana’s internal allocation accounts for 62%. Token allocation and validators were not disclosed in the early days, and there was an overall lack of transparency; 2. Jurisdiction: Bitcoin opened up the Internet native, and Ethereum built the Internet native together with the global community. Solana is more like a corporate token and has participated in lobbying in the United States; 3. Developer platform: Bitcoin does not have a good developer platform, while Ethereum has a large number of important use cases (stablecoins, DeFi, NFTs, prediction markets, decentralized social networking, etc.). Ethereum prioritizes providing a decentralized platform for developers and companies. Coinbase, Blackrock, Fidelity, Stripe, Kraken, Deutsche Bank, Sony, Visa, Polymarket, Uniswap, Aave, and Opensea are all building on the Ethereum ecosystem.