Paradigm criticizes Blast’s launch strategy and marketing tactics

Paradigm, a leading crypto venture capital firm, openly criticized the marketing and execution strategy of Blast, a startup in which the former is an initial investor.

Dan Robinson, head of research at Paradigm, expressed concern about Blast’s approach, saying it sets a worrying precedent for other projects in the blockchain space.

Dan Robinson’s review of Blast

In a statement posted on

There are many components of Blast that I’m excited about and I’d be interested in interacting with people. That said, we at Paradigm believe this week’s announcement crossed lines in both message and execution. For example, we do not agree with the decision to launch the…

– Dan Robinson (@danrobinson) November 26, 2023

“We think it sets a bad precedent for other projects,” Robinson commented, highlighting concerns about how these decisions could influence the broader crypto ecosystem. Robinson also criticized the startup’s marketing approach, noting that “a lot of marketing cheapens the work of a serious team.”

Despite the criticism, Robinson acknowledged the expertise of the Blast team and referred to them as “world-class builders” with a track record of exceptional product development. This recognition is rooted in the past successes of Blast’s founders, including projects like Namebase and the nft marketplace Blur.

However, while acknowledging the capabilities of the Blast team, it is essential to note that this does not imply an endorsement of their recent strategies. Robinson added: “We invest in strong, independent founders that we don’t always agree with… We don’t support these types of tactics and we take our responsibility in the ecosystem seriously.”

Jarrod Watts’ review of Blast

Blast’s recent actions have not only drawn criticism from Paradigm. Jarrod Watts, developer relations engineer at Polygon Labs, has expressed concern about network centralization, citing it as a security threat.

Watts further explained that Blast works as a “3/5 multisignature.” This means that if an attacker gains access to the keys of three of the five team members, the security of all cryptocurrencies in Blast contracts will be compromised.

“Blast is just a 3/5 multigrade…”

I spent the last few days diving into the source code to see if this claim is actually true.

Here’s everything I learned:

– Jarrod Watts (@jarrodWattsDev) November 23, 2023

Watt also disagreed with Blast being classified as layer 2, claiming that it simply collects funds from users and deposits them into protocols like LIDO without using bridges or testnets.

He also expressed concern about the lack of a withdrawal feature, suggesting that the developers’ commitment to implementing a withdrawal feature will determine users’ ability to recover their funds in the future. Blast has also attracted the attention of scammers, with one victim losing $130,000 in a recent phishing incident.

Amid these concerns, Blast has insured over $567 million in total value locked (TVL) since launch. The protocol has also planned an airdrop for January, which continues to attract attention from the crypto community.

<!– ai CONTENT END 1 –>