Tyler Durden imagined a dystopia where capitalism collapses under its own weight, and consumerism enslaves the masses. In his world, the system was a beast destined to eat its own tail. Durden would steal fat discarded from the bodies of the wealthy, make luxury soap from it, and then sell that same soap back to the rich at exorbitant prices. In other words, he fed the system's own "waste" back to it as a "luxury."

Looking at the crypto ecosystem today, we see the curtains rising on a similar tragedy. Crypto is straying from its promised path of a "consumer oriented financial revolution" and risks transforming into a closed circuit drowning in its own internal mechanisms, trying to create value from its own waste, just like Durden’s soap.

We are facing the reality of a Web3 that cannot compete with the massive fortresses of Web2. How long can a structure that fails in user experience, speed, and accessibility survive solely on speculative excitement? Metaverse and GameFi projects, which were once touted to change the world, have already been relegated to the dusty shelves of history. Now, the same question is asked for SocialFi: Is it a true societal transformation, or just the next piece of "trash"? If a technology is indexed only to a "token" price rather than touching human life, it is destined for that shelf.

Bitcoin's journey to its current level was not easy; it proved its worth by passing through dark corridors, prohibitions, and immense resistance. However, I believe a great injustice is being done to the visionary developers who are genuinely sweating in the Web3 ecosystem today. The system does not reward those who create value; it rewards the "airdrop hunter" users who exploit it and the unethical developers aiming for quick wealth.

If the rules of the game are consistently built upon exploiters and opportunists winning, why should those idealist minds who want to instill "goodness" into this system and build truly useful things come here? Just as bad money drives out good money, malicious actors are driving out the good intentioned architects.

The crypto world set out to fundamentally restructure and democratize the modern financial system. Yet, at this point, it has morphed into a structure that imitates the worst aspects of the system it claimed to destroy: excessive leverage, complex derivatives, and hollow assets. Crypto is turning into that famous Ouroboros that will bring about its own end; a mythological snake that eats its own tail, feeds on its own speculation, but offers no real value to the outside world.

As someone who has believed in Bitcoin since day one, I say this: If this cycle is not broken, crypto will not be remembered as a revolution of financial freedom. Like Durden's soap, it will be remembered as a tragic caricature that the system produced from its own fat, only to sell it back to itself as an expensive illusion.

Farcaster + Base + Lens: tum4y

Thank you for reading!

Tyler Durden imagined a dystopia where capitalism collapses under its own weight, and consumerism enslaves the masses. In his world, the system was a beast destined to eat its own tail. Durden would steal fat discarded from the bodies of the wealthy, make luxury soap from it, and then sell that same soap back to the rich at exorbitant prices. In other words, he fed the system's own "waste" back to it as a "luxury."

Looking at the crypto ecosystem today, we see the curtains rising on a similar tragedy. Crypto is straying from its promised path of a "consumer oriented financial revolution" and risks transforming into a closed circuit drowning in its own internal mechanisms, trying to create value from its own waste, just like Durden’s soap.

We are facing the reality of a Web3 that cannot compete with the massive fortresses of Web2. How long can a structure that fails in user experience, speed, and accessibility survive solely on speculative excitement? Metaverse and GameFi projects, which were once touted to change the world, have already been relegated to the dusty shelves of history. Now, the same question is asked for SocialFi: Is it a true societal transformation, or just the next piece of "trash"? If a technology is indexed only to a "token" price rather than touching human life, it is destined for that shelf.

Bitcoin's journey to its current level was not easy; it proved its worth by passing through dark corridors, prohibitions, and immense resistance. However, I believe a great injustice is being done to the visionary developers who are genuinely sweating in the Web3 ecosystem today. The system does not reward those who create value; it rewards the "airdrop hunter" users who exploit it and the unethical developers aiming for quick wealth.

If the rules of the game are consistently built upon exploiters and opportunists winning, why should those idealist minds who want to instill "goodness" into this system and build truly useful things come here? Just as bad money drives out good money, malicious actors are driving out the good intentioned architects.

The crypto world set out to fundamentally restructure and democratize the modern financial system. Yet, at this point, it has morphed into a structure that imitates the worst aspects of the system it claimed to destroy: excessive leverage, complex derivatives, and hollow assets. Crypto is turning into that famous Ouroboros that will bring about its own end; a mythological snake that eats its own tail, feeds on its own speculation, but offers no real value to the outside world.

As someone who has believed in Bitcoin since day one, I say this: If this cycle is not broken, crypto will not be remembered as a revolution of financial freedom. Like Durden's soap, it will be remembered as a tragic caricature that the system produced from its own fat, only to sell it back to itself as an expensive illusion.

Farcaster + Base + Lens: tum4y

Thank you for reading!