Opinion: BTC and ETH Credible Neutrality Involves Token Distribution, Transparency, Jurisdictional Relationships, and Developers

Former Facebook stablecoin project leader David Marcus posted on the X platform to refute 1confirmation founder Nick Tomaino's view that ETH is by no means neutral. In response, Nick Tomaino stated that credible neutrality can be defined from three aspects: 1. Token distribution and transparency: BTC has 0% internal distribution. Anyone can participate as a PoW miner with complete transparency, while ETH has a 10% internal distribution and previously used PoW mining. Solana has an internal distribution of 62%, with early lack of disclosure on token distribution and validators, generally lacking transparency; 2. Jurisdictional relationships: Bitcoin initiated the internet-native, Ethereum is building the internet-native with the global community, while Solana is more like a "corporate token" and has participated in U.S. lobbying; 3. Developer platform: Bitcoin does not have a good developer platform, whereas Ethereum has numerous important use cases (stablecoins, DeFi, NFTs, prediction markets, decentralized social networks, etc.). Ethereum prioritizes providing a decentralized platform for developers and companies, with Coinbase, Blackrock, Fidelity, Stripe, Kraken, Deutsche Bank, Sony, Visa, Polymarket, Uniswap, Aave, and Opensea all building within the Ethereum ecosystem.