The integration of cryptocurrency with traditional business and mainstream finance seems to be an inevitable trend, but this does not mean the demise of the original vision of blockchain.

Written by: Mario Laul

Translated by: Luffy, Foresight News

The foundation of public blockchain was laid by cypherpunks. Although the crypto industry is destined to give birth to a variety of ideas and practices, principles such as decentralization, open-source software, cryptographic security, privacy, and self-sovereignty are the basis of its most disruptive outcomes. However, there is a problem: due to the lack of a regulatory framework that promotes innovation and legitimizes blockchain as an infrastructure with unique features, crypto entrepreneurs face a difficult choice: to adhere to the spirit of purism, significantly complicating the structure and operation of their projects, or to compromise on the original ideals in exchange for support from regulators and more traditional mainstream adoption. I call this the dilemma of crypto entrepreneurs.

Since its inception, blockchain has been associated with grand ambitions: the separation of money from the state, a censorship-resistant global payment and coordination network, software services without single points of failure, and entirely new forms of digital organization and governance. Spreading this revolutionary ambition requires a special environment; in the case of cryptocurrency, the aftermath of the global financial crisis and the evolution of data and business models of large tech companies provided such an environment. Coupled with the global adoption of digital technology and the built-in incentive mechanisms of tokens, cryptocurrency had an almost perfect way to develop its early ecosystem. Since then, the growth of social and financial capital in individual blockchain networks and the entire industry has made cryptocurrency a force to be reckoned with, as evidenced by its prominent role in the 2024 U.S. presidential election.

Revolutionary ambition also requires courage and naivety. Attempts to disrupt any social structure (especially those based on law) often end in failure. Cryptocurrency has capitalized on public discontent, targeting incumbent institutions, but this stance has always been difficult to reconcile with the goal of establishing digital platforms that serve a vast global user base. Similarly, blockchain-based transactions bypass the regulatory requirements of the jurisdictions where the underlying infrastructure operators or traders are located, making them vulnerable to crackdowns by local law enforcement. The ultimate cost of the growth of cryptocurrency is the formalization of its regulatory status and everything that comes with it. To paraphrase a famous saying: you may not be interested in government, but government is interested in you.

While most regulatory content is still in flux, this is precisely what we see in practice. From taxing cryptocurrency-related activities and classifying tokenized assets to enforcing anti-money laundering/anti-terrorism financing rules and holding legal accountability in DAO governance, cryptocurrency is gradually being incorporated into existing regulatory frameworks centered around national jurisdictions. However, more importantly, this process also includes the establishment of new case law and regulatory frameworks, which is the main battleground to ensure that the original value of cryptocurrency is not destroyed in ideological and political struggles that will determine the balance of power among the stakeholders involved. The dilemma of crypto entrepreneurs exists because, like any innovative activity that may have far-reaching effects, its legitimization process is slow and contentious. This is particularly challenging for cryptocurrency, as the actions of some malicious opportunists have led to various misunderstandings about the industry.

Another noteworthy factor is the increasing integration of blockchain with more traditional business and financial models. For those who view cryptocurrency as a parallel system aimed at competing with or replacing traditional institutions, blurring the lines between the two is a source of cognitive dissonance and internal conflict. For others, it is a sign of success and the only sustainable path for blockchain to become systemically important infrastructure. As the crypto industry matures and risks decrease, builders, operators, and user bases will also grow and diversify. While this makes cryptocurrency an attractive market for traditional businesses, extending beyond the initial value proposition, it will further amplify the narrative ambiguity of cryptocurrency, especially if combined with various forms of institutionally controlled infrastructure. This is a long-standing threat that will increase proportionally with the continued adoption of cryptocurrency.

So, as public blockchains enter the next stage of the adoption curve, how can we appropriately describe the relevance of the dilemma of crypto entrepreneurs? On one hand, the mainstream success of cryptocurrency seems to depend more on its close integration with existing systems rather than adhering to some idealized and all-encompassing notion of decentralization. Accepting that most "crypto projects" will ultimately integrate with traditional businesses or open-source software initiatives, or that most blockchain users are unlikely to internalize the cypherpunk spirit to the extent that it becomes a primary factor guiding their consumption choices, is not sacrilege. Ultimately, decentralization should not have any particular advantages, and there is no controversy in centralized enterprises using and operating public blockchains, at least as long as these systems remain publicly verifiable and more resilient than other alternatives. Therefore, once the regulatory status of cryptocurrency is fully clarified, this dilemma becomes irrelevant for most entrepreneurs.

However, to conclude that this marks the end of the original vision would be a mistake. Technologies such as autonomous robots and artificial intelligence are bringing new, far-reaching challenges to the digital revolution, and the demand for powerful computing and information management services has never been more urgent. Blockchain, as an innovative platform, can provide alternatives to old systems that are susceptible to corruption, mass surveillance, and single points of failure, but only if a significant number of entrepreneurs and supporters persist in the difficult path of building truly decentralized, privacy-enhancing, and censorship-resistant systems. While the commercial success of cryptocurrency no longer depends on it, its long-term social legacy certainly does.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。