MegaETH Co-founder: 48 Hours After Leaving Dubai, I Reassessed the Entire Crypto Space

Original Title: Iran Bombing Dubai Forced Me to Confront Tech, Civilization, and Oddly Enough, Crypto-Natives

Original Author: brother bing, Co-founder of MegaETH

Original Compilation: BitpushNews

I wrote and published this article after crossing the UAE-Oman border. The crossing took about an hour, and the process was very smooth.

In the past 48 hours, I have been completely shocked by the technology involved in this war. It was the first time in my life that I witnessed a missile and watched an interception system destroy it. I also came across some surreal, geeky, and even somewhat bizarre details, such as reports of Israeli hackers infiltrating a prayer app to send messages to Iranians.

I have been in the tech industry, but this was indeed my first experience with a defense system. It gave me a new perspective on the relationship between technology and civilization.

Technology may give the illusion that it is "upgrading" civilization, but in fact, it merely amplifies the original trajectory of civilization—much like leveraged trading (don't despair just yet!).

Let me explain.

In a healthy cycle of civilization, technology serves as a booster of productivity and a tool for collaboration. The early internet felt exactly like that.

I still remember applying to American universities in Beijing 17 years ago, receiving help on various forums: strangers sharing advice, essays, and strategies (including how to wisely use early decision admissions). At that time, the concept of closed APIs was unheard of.

But in a downturn cycle, technology becomes something else. It turns into a weapon of attention (sometimes even a real weapon!).

My 60-year-old parents are more addicted to doomsday scrolling than I am (many of my millennial friends are very concerned about our parents). The same internet that once brought us open knowledge is now feeding algorithmic addiction.

This framework explains the internal tension felt by most crypto natives today. It feels as if cryptocurrency was invented for the world we currently live in, yet everyone feels disappointed.

So, what exactly happened?

I don't want to repeat the clichés that many OGs in the industry have already written about "forgetting the cyberpunk spirit" or "getting too close to traditional finance (TradFi)." Instead, I want to offer two thoughts:

1. Cryptocurrency Should Never Be Just an Asset Class

As Evgeny wrote in "Golden Path," cryptocurrency is intended to be a parallel system, a way to restructure finance with fewer boundaries, lower collaboration costs, and flexible exit mechanisms.

Then, things took a turn. Legitimacy was placed before us, almost too easily. And once people tasted legitimacy, they wanted more.

Technology, as an amplifier, naturally seeks the path of least resistance: merging with existing power structures to further gain this legitimacy.

It is important to clarify that bringing institutions into blockchain infrastructure is not wrong.

But in this process, we quietly gave up many old dreams. I find myself increasingly returning to those early use cases: small-scale fully collateralized/under-collateralized loan experiments, Tontine-like structures, and even better cross-border savings and exchanges.

These use cases are too boring. They don't make headlines, let alone generate token hype. In the race for attention maximization and valuation, these niche but structurally significant ideas have been marginalized.

2. Backend Integration ≠ Reinvention

Stablecoins perfectly embody this paradox. They realize the argument for "internet currency," but often merely serve as a better "packaging" of sovereign currencies rather than a structurally independent monetary system.

By the way, Mega certainly has its responsibilities. We have a long way to go.

In my view, many of today's successes should be called "blockchain" rather than "crypto." If the goal is to serve as middleware for traditional finance, that's fine. But let's honestly acknowledge that.

Enough, the price has never been the reason for everyone's disappointment. A sad reality is that between "what we can build" and "what we choose to build," we chose the wrong direction.

Back to the Original Topic: What Does This War Tell Crypto People?

If we zoom out, civilization indeed has its cycles. As a Chinese person, I learned about the changes of dynasties from a young age. But in all those stories about emperors, generals, and rebels, what ultimately shines is individual agency.

I don't know how else to say it, but the crypto natives will not win because they are liked.

The reason we initially achieved some success was that we continuously discovered the shortcomings of the old system and openly criticized them. Then somehow, any dissenting voice was silenced in the process.

In a downturn cycle, it is easy for technology to amplify financialization, manipulation, and superficial growth. But using it to quietly build boring infrastructure that can expand real sovereignty is much harder.

Yet developers can still choose which incentive mechanisms to code. Founders can still decide which use cases to prioritize. More importantly, communities can still choose which values to defend.

If societal sentiment drifts toward insecurity and the search for validation, technology will amplify that insecurity. But if enough people consciously anchor themselves in long-term structures, anchoring in collaborative tools rather than attention traps, then perhaps leverage can still be used to our advantage.

Many friends disapproved of my cross-border trip to Oman, saying the border is chaotic and I should stay in Dubai. Dubai is indeed comfortable. But without personally verifying, I would never know if those claims were true. The result was a quiet border, few people, and a smooth process.

The broader environment of the world is unfavorable to us, but in the long run, it may be beneficial.

For us in the crypto space, it is never too late to reposition ourselves, verify things personally, choose the right actions, and in the most clichéd way, carve out a parallel path.

As my favorite YouTuber says: you can have a very sharp knife, but if the person holding the knife is a coward, nothing will happen. Let’s sharpen the blade. Let’s not be cowards.

Proof complete (QED).

Original Link