- Justin Bons defends Solana, linking fraud to its popularity, not flaws, comparing it to Bitcoin and Ethereum’s early challenges.
- Critics argue Solana’s decentralized design enables scams, but Bons emphasizes trade-offs between freedom and potential risks.
Justin Bons, founder of European cryptocurrency fund Cyber Capital, has publicly challenged claims that Solana’s popularity enables fraud on its blockchain. His remarks follow recent controversies, including a $4.5 billion token scheme linked to Argentine President Javier Milei and accusations of insider trading involving U.S. political figures. Critics argue Solana’s infrastructure attracts malicious activity, but Bons attributes this to its widespread use rather than inherent flaws.
Blaming SOL for the fraud & scams that occur there is a brain-dead take;
This always happens to permissionless chains that rise to a dominant position 🔥
In 2014, it was BTC scams & criminal markets. In 2017 ETH ICOs & in 2021 it was ETH NFTs!
SOL is the BTC & ETH of 2025: 🧵… pic.twitter.com/zbqaIKC1qd
— Justin Bons (@Justin_Bons) February 18, 2025
Bons compared Solana’s challenges to those faced by Bitcoin and Ethereum during their growth phases. He stated that scammers historically target high-traffic platforms, drawing a parallel to early internet struggles with cybercrime. “Public chains cannot control bad actors without sacrificing decentralization” he wrote, suggesting users must tolerate risks to preserve open access. He likened this trade-off to the “Wild West” phase of technological evolution, where progress and peril coexist.
“Scammers & criminals will always seek out the cutting-edge, as it is on this frontier where they can extract the most, just like the Wild West of old. Does that make the frontier bad? Of course not, in the same way that BTC & ETH were not bad during their heydays.” – Justin Bons
The debate centers on Solana’s decentralized framework, which limits centralized oversight. While critics argue this enables exploitation, Bons emphasized that protocols competing freely drive technical advances. He acknowledged, however, that this environment exposes users to potential harm, requiring personal accountability.
Reactions to Bons’ stance vary
Some agree with his historical comparisons, noting that early internet adoption similarly involved navigating unregulated spaces. Others dismiss his arguments, citing Solana’s technical design as uniquely vulnerable to abuse.
A truly decentralized, permissionless & public blockchain cannot block criminals, scams & fraud… That is the trade-off we make for freedom, truly making it the home of the brave; if you cannot stomach that, go back to centralized products!
He compares the role of memecoins in crypto to pornography in the early internet, suggesting both drove innovation in their respective fields, even if controversial. Bons values the competitive nature of the crypto space, noting it drives innovation and exerts “evolutionary pressure,” leading to the dominance shift from BTC to ETH to SOL.
He suggests that regulatory improvements could support a resurgence of ICOs, providing fairer opportunities than current VC-dominated scenarios. Bons advocates for accepting the current dominance of SOL, despite its imperfections, as part of the broader adoption of decentralized blockchain technology.
Either way, blaming SOL for this recent mania is completely misguided; if anything, we should be thankful that somebody was able to pick the ball back up after ETH fumbled it.
One critic questioned how a blockchain prone to exploitation could be considered beneficial, while another accused Bons of aligning with venture capital interests.
There is plenty to criticize SOL for, but supporting fraud, scams & fraud is not it.
Proposed solutions to Solana’s reputation crisis include decentralized tools to freeze fraudulent wallets and reimburse victims. Others recommend stricter token launch rules to reduce automated scams. Bons endorsed reviving regulated initial coin offerings (ICOs), arguing they could balance opportunities for retail investors and institutions.
