I learned very early, and life has confirmed it again and again, that appearance and origin tell you remarkably little about a person’s character, ability or intentions. Behaviour does. Some of the ugliest KOL rugs, drainers and extraction schemes this industry has produced came from polished Americans, well connected Westerners and people from all over the world who later ended up operating comfortably from Dubai. Nice teeth, white skin, expensive watches, perfect English, good lighting, large following. None of that stopped anyone from robbing people. So if Arc fails, fine. I am happy about it. I have no emotional attachment to Arc and I will criticise it where it deserves criticism. What I find fucking bizarre is watching people suddenly treat the chain as suspicious because some of the devs and early users do not look like the usual white, camera ready crypto supermodels they are used to seeing on their timeline. You idiots are scared of how some developers look while BlackRock, Mastercard, Visa, DTCC, ICE, Circle and half of the old fiat establishment are sitting behind the network, and somehow that gets less attention than someone’s face, accent or nationality. That is insane. People will analyse a developer’s skin colour, passport and appearance like forensic evidence, then see BlackRock and Mastercard embedded in the infrastructure and barely react because those logos look respectable. If you actually care about risk, look at who controls the infrastructure. Look at who validates the network. Look at who controls the stablecoin. Look at who can freeze assets. Look at who got early access. Look at who sets the rules and who captures the value if this thing scales. Those are real questions. Whether a developer looks like the kind of person you would expect to see selling you a Solana memecoin on X is completely irrelevant. A space that spends all day talking about permissionless finance should probably stop judging credibility like a fucking beauty contest.