David Hundeyin
David Hundeyin

@DavidHundeyin

11 Tweets Dec 07, 2022
Only crypto bros can say "The goal is mass adoption of crypto" in the same breath as "Always self-custody - not your keys, not your coins," and not see the glaring contradiction therein.
At some point the elephant in the room needs to be addressed:
Absolute financial decentralisation based on a distributed ledger, which is what bitcoin originally was, is fundamentally not scalable or user friendly.
If mass adoption is the goal, there must be a trade-off with some degree of centralization, which nobody wants to hear.
Expecting bitcoin/crypto to achieve true mass adoption using only self-custody wallets and direct on-chain transactions is classic tech bro utopian thinking.
It entails total reshaping of consumer financial behaviour in ways that have not changed for several hundreds of years.
It ignores the fact that the current financial paradigm - placing your money in the care of a regulated institution that will give you access to it as and when required - exists precisely because total self-custody was woefully inefficient and bred only poverty and war.
The crypto bros who genuinely and unironically believe that everyone from Talinn to Aba should own a hardware wallet and run a bitcoin node, are like the libertarian bros who believe the US dollar should return to a gold-backed standard.
Unrealistic and sheltered.
I say this as a longtime crypto advocate.
My experience is that crypto has democratised the global economy by enabling skilled workers in the global south to access earning opportunities without jumping through the nonsensical arbitrary hoops of conventional finance.
But the ecosystem needs to stop pretending that mass adoption will ever be predicated on anything other than convenience and ease of access - the 2 things that self-custody and direct on-chain transacting categorically are not.
Most consumers simply don't care that much.
For most non-traders, crypto's primary value lies in its use as money.
Like so, capital restrictions in places with irresponsible governments like Nigeria, Venezuela and Zimbabwe can be easily and reliably circumvented.
People just want ease, not technical mumbo jumbo.
Like it or not, we NEED platforms like Binance and Coinbase. Without the on-off ramp they provide to traditional finance, crypto would be little more than the currency of the dark web.
They simulate the consumer experience of a bank account and generally function reliably.
Is there a risk that they could do what FTX did and disappear in their own smoke? Yes. Is there an implicit risk to consumers? Yes - which is precisely why traditional finance had to be regulated in the first place.
Does regulation of crypto conflict with crypto ethos? Yes. But-
Crypto is not a religion.
Only religions have dogmatic, unchanging expectations and principles that refuse to adjust to material reality, and instead fight Holy Wars against heretics and apostates.
Satoshi wrote a whitepaper, not a Holy Book.

Loading suggestions...