Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin believes that the direction of blockchain applications often mirrors the intentions and ethics of their creators. He cites that projects like Pump.fun are derived from bad social philosophy.
In a recent discussion, he highlighted how the impact—positive or negative—of crypto projects is shaped by the values driving their development.
Buterin Says Pump.fun and Terra Reflect What Not to Build in Crypto
Buterin praised a handful of decentralized applications that align with Ethereum’s long-term vision. These include Railgun, Farcaster, Polymarket, and the messaging app Signal.
On the flip side, he criticized platforms such as Pump.fun, Terra/Luna, and the collapsed FTX exchange, describing them as harmful examples of what not to build.
“The differences in what the app does stem from differences in beliefs in developers’ heads about what they are here to accomplish,” Buterin explained.
Vitalik Buterin Talking about Social Philosophy in Crypto. Source: Warpcast
In the past, he noted that tools like Polymarket could move beyond betting on elections and serve as useful mechanisms for improving decision-making in governance, media, and even scientific research.
Previously, the Ethereum co-founder had warned about schemes that prioritize hype over substance, such as Terra/Luna and FTX. He has also consistently urged the crypto space, especially DeFi, to build with ethical intent and long-term utility in mind.
How Developer Ethics Shape Blockchain’s Future
To explain his views on Ethereum’s unique development path, Buterin compared it to C++, a general-purpose programming language.
Unlike C++, Ethereum is only partially general-purpose. Many of its core innovations, like account abstraction or the shift to proof-of-stake, rely heavily on developers’ commitment to Ethereum’s broader mission.
“Ethereum L1 is not quite in that position: someone who doesn’t believe in decentralization would not add light clients, or FOCIL, or (good forms of) account abstraction; someone who doesn’t mind energy waste would not spend half a decade moving to PoS… But the EVM opcodes might have been roughly the same either way. So Ethereum is perhaps 50% general-purpose,” Buterin said.
Buterin furthered that Ethereum apps are around 80% special-purpose. Because of this, the ethical framework and goals of the people building them play a critical role in shaping what the network becomes.
Tesla’s Q1 2025 financial report reveals that despite missing revenue expectations, the company still holds over $951 million worth of Bitcoin.
After its initial purchase in February 2021 and the sale of 75% of its Bitcoin holdings in July 2022, Tesla currently holds approximately 11,509 BTC.
Bitcoin Remains a Strategic Asset for Tesla
According to a filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on April 22, 2025, Tesla’s Q1 revenue reached $19.34 billion. This figure falls significantly short of market expectations, which stood at $21.37 billion.
The electric vehicle segment, Tesla’s primary revenue stream, posted a 20% year-over-year decline. The main reason is a 13% drop in deliveries and a 16% reduction in production.
Despite this, Tesla’s stock price has dropped 41% since the beginning of 2025, under pressure from controversies surrounding CEO Elon Musk’s involvement in government roles and ongoing protests against the company.
A key point of interest in Tesla’s Q1 2025 financial report for the crypto community is the company’s Bitcoin holdings. As of March 31, 2025, Tesla owns 11,509 Bitcoin, valued at approximately $951 million, according to data from Bitcointreasuries.net.
Bitcoin’s 12% decline in Q1 2025 slightly reduced the value of Tesla’s BTC stash from $1.076 billion at the end of 2024. However, today, with Bitcoin prices rising 6% to $93,000, the value of Tesla’s Bitcoin holdings has again exceeded $1 billion.
New regulations by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) require companies to mark digital assets to market value each quarter, impacting Tesla’s financial reporting. Previously, this rule enabled Tesla to record a $600 million profit from Bitcoin in Q4 2024 due to market appreciation.
Thus, Tesla did not make any Bitcoin-related transactions during this quarter. This indicates the company is sticking with a HODL strategy, treating Bitcoin as part of its strategic investment portfolio. Other major firms, like Strategy and Metaplanet, are also following this long-term holding approach.
Elon Musk Refocuses on Tesla
Tesla’s continued Bitcoin holding amid market volatility shows Elon Musk’s confidence in the cryptocurrency’s long-term potential. However, it also raises questions about the fate of Tesla’s BTC stash, especially as Musk is expected to reduce his focus on DOGE and shift more attention back to Tesla starting this May.
“Not stepping down, just reducing time allocation now that @DOGE is established,” Musk stated.
Tesla now stands at a critical crossroads, with Dan Ives, an analyst at Wedbush, calling it a “code red situation.” If the current scenario persists, Musk may be forced to restructure Tesla’s financial strategy, including its Bitcoin holdings.
BeInCrypto reported that the cryptocurrency market will be volatile in the short term until mid-May 2025, citing economic pressures and trade policy uncertainty. The market might stabilize in mid- to late-Q2, supported by historical trends and loose monetary policy. Strong growth is expected in Q3, driven by Bitcoin’s post-halving cycle, institutional adoption, and clearer US crypto regulations.
The collapse of the MANTRA (OM) token has left investors reeling, with many facing significant losses. As analysts comb through the causes of the collapse, many questions remain.
BeInCrypto consulted industry experts to identify five critical red flags behind MANTRA’s downfall and reveal strategies investors can adopt to steer clear of similar pitfalls in the future.
MANTRA (OM) Crash: What Investors Missed and How to Avoid Future Losses
On April 13, BeInCrypto broke the news of OM’s 90% crash. The collapse raised several concerns, with investors accusing the team of orchestrating a pump-and-dump scheme. Experts believe that there were many early signs of trouble.
In addition, the project adopted an inflationary tokenomic model with an uncapped supply, replacing the previous hard cap. As part of this transition, the total token supply was also increased to 1.7 billion.
However, the move wasn’t without drawbacks. According to Jean Rausis, co-founder of SMARDEX, tokenomics was a point of concern in the OM collapse.
“The project doubled its token supply to 1.77 billion in 2024 and shifted to an inflationary model, which diluted its original holders. Complex vesting favored insiders, while low circulating supply and massive FDV fueled hype and price manipulation,” Jean Rausis told BeInCrypto.
Moreover, the team’s control over the OM supply also raised centralization concerns. Experts believe this was also a factor that could have led to the alleged price manipulation.
“About 90% of OM tokens were held by the team, indicating a high level of centralization that could potentially lead to manipulation. The team also maintained control over governance, which undermined the project’s decentralized nature,” said Phil Fogel, co-founder of Cork.
Phil Fogel acknowledged that a concentrated token supply isn’t always a red flag. However, it’s crucial for investors to know who holds large amounts, their lock-up terms, and whether their involvement aligns with the project’s decentralization goals.
Moreover, Ming Wu, the founder of RabbitX, also argued that analyzing this data is essential to uncover any potential risks that could undermine the project in the long term.
“Tools like bubble maps can help identify potential risks related to token distribution,” Wu advised.
2. OM Price Action
2025 has been marked as the year of significant market volatility. The broader macroeconomic pressures have weighed heavily on the market, with the majority of the coins experiencing steep losses. Yet, OM’s price action was relatively stable until the latest crash.
OM vs. TOTAL Market Performance. Source: TradingView
“The biggest red flag was simply the price action. The whole market was going down, and nobody cared about MANTRA, and yet its token price somehow kept pumping in unnatural patterns – pump, flat, pump, flat again,” Jean Rausis disclosed.
He added that this was a clear sign of a potential issue or problem with the project. Nevertheless, he noted that identifying the differentiating price action would require some technical analysis know-how. Thus, investors lacking the knowledge would have easily missed it.
Despite this, Rausis highlighted that even the untrained eye could find other signs that something was off, ultimately leading to the crash.
Strategies to Protect Yourself
While investors remained optimistic about OM’s resilience amid a market downturn, this ended up costing them millions. Eric He, LBank’s Community Angel Officer, and Risk Control Adviser emphasized the importance of proactive risk management to avoid OM-style collapses.
“First, diversification is key—spreading capital across projects limits single-token exposure. Stop-loss triggers (e.g., 10-20% below buy price) can automate damage control in volatile conditions,” Eric shared with BeInCrypto.
Ming Wu had a similar perspective, emphasizing the importance of avoiding over-allocation to a single token. The executive explained that a diversified investment strategy helps mitigate risk and enhances overall portfolio stability.
“Investors can use perpetual futures as a risk management tool to hedge against potential price declines in their holdings,” Wu remarked.
Meanwhile, Phil Fogel advised focusing on a token’s liquidity. Key factors include the float size, price sensitivity to sell orders, and who can significantly impact the market.
3. Project Fundamentals
Experts also highlighted major discrepancies in MANTRA’s TVL. Eric He pointed out a significant gap between the token’s fully diluted valuation (FDV) and the TVL. OM’s FDV reached $9.5 billion, while its TVL was only $13 million, indicating a potential overvaluation.
“A $9.5 billion valuation against $13 million TVL, screamed instability,” Forest Bai, co-founder of Foresight Ventures, stated.
Notably, several issues were also raised regarding the airdrop. Jean Rausis called the airdrop a “mess.” He cited many issues, including delays, frequent changes to eligibility rules, and the disqualification of half the participants. Meanwhile, suspected bots were not removed.
“The airdrop disproportionately favored insiders while excluding genuine supporters, reflecting a lack of fairness,” Phil Fogel reiterated.
The criticism expanded further as Fogel pointed out the team’s alleged associations with questionable entities and ties to questionable initial coin offerings (ICOs), raising doubts about the project’s credibility. Eric He also suggested that MANTRA was allegedly tied to gambling platforms in the past.
Strategies to Protect Yourself
Forest Bai underscored the importance of verifying the project team’s credentials, reviewing the project roadmap, and monitoring on-chain activity to ensure transparency. He also advised investors to assess community engagement and regulatory compliance to gauge the project’s long-term viability.
Ming Wu also stressed distinguishing between real growth and artificially inflated metrics.
“It’s important to differentiate real growth from activity that’s artificially inflated through incentives or airdrops, unsustainable tactics like ‘selling a dollar for 90 cents’ may generate short-term metrics but don’t reflect actual engagement,” Wu informed BeInCrypto.
Finally, Wu recommended researching the background of the project’s team members to uncover any history of fraudulent activity or involvement in questionable ventures. This would ensure that investors are well-informed before committing to any project.
4. Whale Movements
As BeInCrypto reported earlier, before the crash, a whale wallet reportedly associated with the MANTRA team deposited 3.9 million OM tokens into the OKX exchange. Experts highlighted that this wasn’t an isolated incident.
“Large OM transfers (43.6 million tokens, ~$227 million) to exchanges days prior were a major warning of potential sell-offs,” Forest Bai conveyed to BeInCrypto.
Ming Wu also explained that investors should pay close attention to such large transfers, which often act as warning signals. Moreover, analysts at CryptoQuant also outlined what investors should look out for.
“OM transfers into exchanges amounted to as much as $35 million in just an hour. This represented an alert sign as: Transfers into exchanges are below $8 million in a typical hour (excluding transfers into Binance, which are typically large given the size of the exchange). Transfers into exchanges represented more than a third of the total OM transferred, which indicates a high transfer volume into exchanges,” CryptoQuant informed BeInCrypto.
Strategies to Protect Yourself
CryptoQuant stated that investors need to monitor the flows of any token into exchanges, as it could indicate increasing price volatility in the near future.
Meanwhile, Risk Control Adviser Eric He outlined four strategies to stay up-to-date when it comes to large transfers.
Chain Sleuthing: Tools like Arkham and Nansen allow investors to track large transfers and monitor wallet activity.
Set Alerts: Platforms like Etherscan and Glassnode notify investors of unusual market movements.
Track Exchange Flows: Users need to track large flows into centralized exchanges.
Check Lockups: Dune Analytics helps investors determine if team tokens are being released earlier than expected.
He also recommended focusing on the market structure.
“OM’s crash proved market depth is non-negotiable: Kaiko data showed 1% order book depth collapsed 74% before the fall. Always check liquidity metrics on platforms like Kaiko; if 1% depth is below $500,000, that’s a red flag,” Eric revealed to BeInCrypto.
Additionally, Phil Fogel underlined the importance of monitoring platforms like X (formerly Twitter) for any rumors or discussions about possible dumps. He stressed the need to analyze liquidity to assess whether a token can handle sell pressure without causing a significant price drop.
Interestingly, experts were slightly divided on how CEXs contributed to OM’s crash. Forest Bai claimed that CEX liquidations during low-liquidity hours worsened the crash by triggering cascading sell-offs. Eric He corroborated this sentiment.
“CEX liquidations played a major role in the OM crash, acting as an accelerant. With thin liquidity—1% depth falling from $600,000 to $147,000—forced closures triggered cascading liquidations. Over $74.7 million was wiped in 24 hours,” he mentioned.
“Analyzing the open interest in the OM derivatives market reveals that it was less than 0.1% of OM’s market capitalization. However, what’s particularly interesting is that during the market collapse, open interest in OM derivatives actually increased by 90%,” Wu expressed to BeInCrypto.
According to the executive, this challenges the idea that liquidations or forced closures caused the price drop. Instead, it indicates that traders and investors increased their short positions as the price fell.
Strategies to Protect Yourself
While the involvement of CEXs remains debatable, the experts did address the key point of investor protection.
“Investors can limit leverage to avoid forced liquidations, choose platforms with transparent risk policies, monitor open interest for liquidation risks, and hold tokens in self-custody wallets to reduce CEX exposure,” Forest Bai recommended.
Eric He also advised that investors should mitigate risks by adjusting leverage dynamically based on volatility. If tools like ATR or Bollinger Bands signal turbulence, exposure should be reduced.
The MANTRA (OM) collapse is a powerful reminder of the importance of due diligence and risk management in cryptocurrency investments. Investors can minimize the risk of falling into similar traps by carefully assessing tokenomics, monitoring on-chain data, and diversifying investments.
With expert insights, these strategies will help guide investors toward smarter, more secure decisions in the crypto market.
