Ethereum (ETH)

Corpchains don't have the same permissionless definitions like in the West.

But more like in authoritarian regimes like Iran, China, North Korea.

You can say everything you want there.

As long it's permissioned and in line with the great leader ;)

$ETH IS KING https://t.co/pSzxgp3Zo9

Well written, I don't have a deep understanding of Base, mainly because most current public chains have little "innovation"; they just redeploy some of the most powerful DeFi-related projects from $ETH onto their chain. Even if that's considered "powerful", that perception is often self‑assigned, without carefully considering whether users will actually use it, or why they would.

This is essentially a kind of "lazy governance". A public chain is used by users not merely because it's faster, has higher TPS, or cheaper gas, but because it offers profit opportunities or innovation. Especially in the crypto space, it must either facilitate trading or generate yield; otherwise, why would users adopt it?

As mentioned at the start, what's the point of simply porting protocols from Ethereum? Why would users move assets from ETH to your chain—are they safer or earn more? If neither, and it's just a regular cross‑chain asset, how can you attract user interest?

Indeed, innovation is hard, but it's the core of public‑chain competition today. Without users, there's no revenue. Why would users transfer or trade assets on a chain? Many chains think having their own DEX or PerpDex is enough, which is wrong. The key is having unique assets that give users a reason to trade.