Dom keeps complaining, but the market has already delivered its verdict, zero trust in DFINITY and its leadership.
Actions speak louder than words.
$Near backed by Smart money
Crypto Bro retweeted
Are more than 50 right wing goons threatening with violence right outside the mandir marg police station not a "breach of peace" for the Delhi Police?
This hooliganism is being enabled while peaceful protestors are being framed as disruptors in the imagination of the people.
Crypto Bro retweeted
In a small Greek restaurant in Cambridge my journey of love began.
Rajiv and I created a world filled with love, laughter and memories. On 10th November, I share that world with you.
Crypto Bro retweeted
$ICP is attracting more users, but its price isn’t following.
Over the past month, ICP dropped 8.3%, while network activity tells a different story:
- Daily active addresses: +35%, reaching 3,860.
- New addresses: +45%, reaching 710 per day.
That’s encouraging, but I wouldn’t call it an adoption breakout yet.
Activity is still roughly half its November 2025 peak.
The price structure is also fragile:
$2.50 is the key downside level I’m watching, while reclaiming $2.85 would weaken the bearish setup. A sustained move above $3.30–$3.60 would be more convincing.
Can growing onchain usage eventually support $ICP’s valuation?
Crypto Bro retweeted
$NEAR vs $ICP
Dom may be right about the cryptography, but he's losing the only scoreboard that pays anyone.
> Chain TVL: $244M vs $12M
> Below ATH: -76% vs -99.7%
> Market cap / TVL: ~25x vs ~100x
> Since Feb : 4.3x vs flat
👉 What Dom actually said about NEAR
Dom shared a PhD engineer's review calling Confidential Intents a permissioned instance with trusted operators, no public code and no public operator list.
He later escalated to calling it snake oil and floated legal action over vetKeys, putting his odds at 70% to 85%, though all of that remains allegation.
👉 Where the criticism lands and where not
On the trust model he has a point, since a private shard with a handful of permissioned validators and a TEE bridge is not threshold cryptography.
Disclosure is weaker ground, because NEAR described the permissioned shard and TEE bridge publicly from its February launch.
👉 What the market chose to pay for
Confidential Intents now holds $171M, up 6.4x since June, though part of that growth was incentivized. All of ICP holds about $12M.
👉 My take
You could argue users never asked for the purest design, they asked for private swaps with compliance built in, and NEAR shipped that first.
Dom's engineering points deserve a technical answer, but a founder attacking a rival from 99.7% below ATH will always get read as marketing.
ICP's own docs also say standard subnet state is readable by node operators, so neither side offers privacy by default.
If you had to pick, does cryptographic purity still matter when the market keeps paying for the practical version?
Crypto Bro retweeted
I told you that sooner or later, technology would be copied, and technological capabilities would eventually become commoditized.
NEAR has numerous institutions backing it.
The Bitwise NEAR ETF is already listed in New York, and Grayscale is preparing to convert its NEAR Trust into an ETF in the United States.
Powerful institutional investors and major financial players are lining up behind NEAR.
And what have you accomplished?
In the end, your obsession with technological superiority has left you spending years developing technology, only to watch others replicate it and reap the benefits.
What is your next plan?
Who care if NEAR took ICP tech, proprietary or not. Everyone has stolen Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Uniswap code forever. The ultimate winner is whoever is more battle-tested, capturing the most users, liquidity, and trust.
