The discourse surrounding blockchain and cryptocurrency has increasingly polarized, with proponents and detractors presenting rigid and opposing views. Critics of cryptocurrency and blockchain technology often depict the decentralized ecosystem as rife with criminal activities and illicit trade, attributing many of society’s modern issues to these technologies. This characterization, however, is not entirely accurate and overlooks the potential benefits of decentralized systems.
Conversely, advocates of blockchain and cryptocurrency present these technologies as revolutionary alternatives capable of enduring beyond current systems. Nevertheless, their argument falls short when it fails to address the crucial aspect of continuity of service. Throughout history, the value of innovations has been defined not merely by their existence but by their utility and practical applications. From the inception of civilization, human ingenuity has derived value from creating tools and systems that serve specific purposes, such as starting fires, crafting tools, or inventing the wheel.
The Essence of Blockchain Value
The fundamental value of blockchain technology lies not in its mere existence but in its applications and capabilities. Unlike traditional user interfaces, blockchain architecture lacks an inherent user interface and its coin features do not directly facilitate value transfer. The perception of stored value in blockchain systems hinges on their capacity to enable exchanges and transactions.
A recent anomaly involving CrowdStrike, a widely utilized provider, exemplified this point. An upgrade software issue temporarily suspended trades, transactions, and value movement for some exchanges while leaving others unaffected. This incident underscored the vulnerability of stored value when intermediary systems encounter disruptions. The value itself was not lost; it was temporarily rendered inaccessible until the technical issue was resolved. The impact extended beyond financial instruments, affecting data-intensive institutions like hospitals and airports in regions where CrowdStrike had successfully secured businesses.
Diverse Opinions in the Crypto Community
The crypto community is no stranger to polarized opinions, with both critics and advocates expressing strong views. However, opinions often lack a comprehensive understanding of the technology’s fundamentals. Comparisons between countries or systems, such as those involving Nigeria, highlight the importance of information, experience, and execution in forming credible opinions. Individuals with firsthand experience in their own country can relate directly to its systems and institutions, whereas their knowledge of alternative systems often relies on hearsay.
Challenges in the Blockchain/Web 3 Space
Within the blockchain and Web 3 spectrum, a subset known as ‘Bitcoin Maxis’ often prioritizes Bitcoin to the exclusion of other cryptocurrencies and blockchain use cases. This narrow focus represents a significant weakness when engaging with critics. In contrast, cryptocritics tend to possess a broader understanding of the blockchain and Web 3 landscape, enabling them to present more informed and robust arguments. Bitcoin Maxis’ defensive stance and unilateral dismissal of other cryptocurrencies make them appear less knowledgeable and less capable of defending their positions effectively.
Ethereum enthusiasts, for instance, may not be intimately familiar with every aspect of Polygon but at least possess a general awareness of it. In contrast, some Bitcoin Maxis lack the ability to explain critical concepts like Proof of Work (PoW) as a consensus mechanism or the significance of Sybil Defense Mechanisms. Their limited knowledge also extends to newer developments such as BRC 69 or Ordinals. This knowledge gap undermines their ability to engage in meaningful debates and defend the broader potential of blockchain technology.
The Core Principle of Decentralization
Both critics and advocates often miss the fundamental relevance of decentralization. The primary goal of decentralized systems is to provide autonomy over stored value, enhancing individual freedom, personal sovereignty, and protection against centralized control. Recent service outages do not prove the superiority of any side in this debate. The restoration of services only reignites the same arguments, regardless of whether one supports Bitcoin, other cryptocurrencies, or traditional financial systems like fiat currency or central bank digital currencies (CBDCs).
Outages do not serve as revelations about the current state of decentralization. Instead, they highlight the ongoing work needed to achieve full end-to-end decentralization. The advent of Bitcoin in 2008 marked a significant leap, but other historical innovations, such as the printing press, democracy, and the internet, also played pivotal roles in catalyzing decentralization. Centralizing forces have historically attempted to thwart societal evolutions to maintain control and capture income.
Today, these forces continue to deflect the concept of Web3, misrepresenting it as a mere product label rather than recognizing its potential to transform societal structures fundamentally. The ongoing debate underscores the importance of informed perspectives and a comprehensive understanding of the technology’s broader implications.
