2025-12-29 02:22:38

When you've designed a solid experiment, you'll notice something: people start throwing FUD at it.

Think about it—FUD isn't just noise. It's actually a multi-layered signal worth unpacking.

Take "Uncertainty" as an example. You've probably caught this in the community conversations by now. People claim they're being rational, but scratch the surface and uncertainty is what's really driving the train. It's not just fear of losses. It's the fog itself—not knowing what comes next, what the competitors are building, what regulators might do. That fog breeds doubt.

And here's the thing: when you propose something genuinely innovative in crypto, the FUD response almost validates it. The more real the idea, the stronger the emotional pushback. Why? Because people sense disruption. They sense the old playbook doesn't work anymore.

So FUD becomes a weird barometer. It's fear, yes. Uncertainty, absolutely. But also doubt—doubt that the current system holds. That's actually the conversation worth having.

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

12 Likes

Reward
12
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

DeFiVeteran

· 5h ago

The bigger the FUD, the more it indicates hitting a sore spot. I agree with that. It's really just a conflict of interest; who would sincerely wish for the overthrowers? This logic is a bit circular... Strong FUD might also indicate that this thing is just trash. Unc is the most outrageous; everyone says it's uncertain but still pretends to be a technical analyst. That's right, true innovation has never been welcomed. FUD itself is proof of market inefficiency; rational people should have seen through it long ago. Destroying the old order will inevitably be criticized; this is a necessary pain. Sometimes, a lot of FUD isn't because the idea is good, but because the marketing is aggressive. So the current question is how to distinguish genuine FUD from reasonable skepticism.

View OriginalReply0

P2ENotWorking

· 5h ago

The more FUD there is, the more it actually indicates that the idea really hit a nerve. This logic is quite interesting. To put it simply, people are afraid of change; once their comfort zone is broken, they start shifting blame. The part about uncertainty is correct; everyone pretending to be rational is actually just being cowardly. But don't take FUD too seriously as a treasure; sometimes it's just genuinely trash ideas.

View OriginalReply0

BloodInStreets

· 5h ago

The most common type of FUD during bottom-fishing is this kind. The more a project is criticized, the more likely it is to have potential... but the prerequisite is that you must be able to distinguish between genuine innovation and pure scammers.

View OriginalReply0

SnapshotLaborer

· 5h ago

FUD more often indicates that the idea is on the right track; I agree with this logic. Really, the more revolutionary something is, the more criticism it attracts, which actually proves that it has touched a sensitive nerve. But to be fair... those uncertain voices are also quite real; not all opposition is without reason. Basically, it's a struggle between the old and the new. Supporters of the old system will naturally jump out, understand? Wait, is it possible that some of these haven't been thought through? How do we distinguish between FUD and genuine concerns?

View OriginalReply0

CafeMinor

· 6h ago

FUD indicates the right direction; I buy into this logic. --- Listen to this argument... the more they criticize, the more promising it seems, so I have to be more optimistic about this project. --- Actually, it's reasonable that a group of people don't want to be overwhelmed by revolutionary shouts. --- That part about uncertainty really hit me; clearly they're afraid of losing their jobs but insist on calling themselves rational haha. --- This kind of theory is good for self-comfort... Anyway, the more FUD there is, the more I hold. --- True innovation will inevitably be criticized; I've seen this rule proven too many times in the crypto world. --- So the more influential figures criticize harshly, the more we should follow? That seems a bit forced. --- Yeah, old tricks don't work anymore, so they start spamming; I get it. --- FUD as a barometer is a good analogy, but how do we determine if it's a barometer and not a red flag?

View OriginalReply0