Author: Zeke, Researcher at YBB Capital
I. Compliance Submission
How did cryptocurrency move from the margins to the mainstream? Over the past decade, decentralized blockchain systems created a regulatory wilderness for the world. Satoshi Nakamoto's vision of a peer-to-peer electronic cash system may not have been realized, but it opened the door to a parallel world. In this world, law, government, society, and even religion could not interfere—an internet existing on countless nodes, free from centralized control.
Escaping regulation can be said to be the most important driving force behind the industry's early success. From the ICO boom and its endless derivatives, to the DeFi explosive growth triggered by UNI, and now the rise of so-called super applications like stablecoins—every important milestone stems from the ability to break through traditional financial complexity. It was by breaking free from traditional financial bureaucracy that this field was ultimately achieved.
But ironically: just like the Age of Exploration did not abandon ships after failing to discover new continents, the cryptocurrency world seems to be retreating. Perhaps the turning point was the approval of the Bitcoin ETF, or perhaps the moment Trump regained power. Regardless, the purest era of cryptocurrency seems to be ending. The industry is now pursuing compliance, trying to meet traditional financial needs. Stablecoins, RWA, and payment use cases have become the new mainstream. Beyond that, only pure asset issuance remains—a picture, a story, a contract address are our last remaining topics. "Memecoin chain" is no longer a derogatory term.
How did we get here? Over the past two years, I explored from multiple angles, but ultimately boiled it down to one point: blockchain still lacks effective tools to constrain malicious actors behind wallet addresses. We can ensure honest nodes and achieve permissionless DeFi. But we cannot stop what happens in this dark forest. The decline of many narratives is inevitable. Non-Fungible Tokens, GameFi, and SocialFi largely depend on the real-world teams behind them. Blockchain is excellent for fundraising, but who will supervise how these teams use these funds? Who will ensure a story can become a real product?
The vision of non-financial applications cannot be achieved through infrastructure upgrades alone. If these things cannot be done well on centralized servers, how can we expect blockchain to do better? We cannot impose proof-of-work standards on project teams. Ironically, today's shift towards compliance may be the beginning of the non-financial crypto era. This is a painful reality—feeling contradictory, yet increasingly unavoidable.
Cryptocurrency is becoming a subset of traditional systems. The power to record ledgers is being being away up up grassroots innovation is fading. Opportunities are shrinking. The future will likely be the era of on-chain hegemony.
II. Stablecoins
What does on-chain hegemony mean? In my view, it is manifested in two two aspects: the the rise of stablecoins and the retelling of traditional internet stories.
This is just the first point. Today, all mainstream participants are exploring how to become asset issuance platforms and the true meaning of innovative asset issuance. Launchpad has become the last platform for native cryptocurrency users to dream of getting rich. However, even so, the situation is not healthy. Users must pay to use platforms or tools like GMGN to participate, and the experience is like shooting in a trench. Asset issuance has become increasingly complex, and in some cases, is now completely conducted off-chain.
Of course, Non-Fungible Token and GameFi projects have never been fully decentralized, but at least they have on-chain components. They have driven infrastructure development and helped the industry gain mainstream attention. Starting from the AI framework earlier this year, we now see token issuance of completely off-chain projects - some of which are asset issuance platforms themselves, completely avoiding on-chain interactions. Extreme speculation is dragging down industry standards. What is the meaning of all this?
CZ and Vitalik were confused by the meme coin frenzy and proposed the concept of DeSci (Decentralized Science): let speculators speculate, while true innovation happens in scientific research. This seems to be a rare convergence of interests. But can laboratory research and classical mechanics really compare with today's internet memes and bizarre AI works? This claim was only briefly popular. After the AI and DeSci hype cooled down, celebrity coins began to trend - from Trump in North America to President Milei in South America - draining the market's last liquidity.
When the market cools and narratives no longer cycle, asset issuance becomes a Ponzi scheme. The "Virtuals" model combines Binance's Launchpool with Alpha strategy: stake tokens to earn points for participation, then re-stake the newly issued tokens. Prices indeed soared. However... this brazenness no longer excites me. What's next? The so-called internet capital market of "Believe"?
I'm not sure. But in the last cycle, amid various flywheels, Ponzi schemes, and fleeting narratives, we at least welcomed DeFi - this true gem that inspired countless innovations. What will this new wave of speculation bring? What I see is a continued lowering of issuance thresholds, followed by a surge in malicious activities. Perhaps what we truly need is a new rulebook.
IV. Attention
In the past, projects rose through narratives and technology - triggering consensus and thus driving growth. Now, we buy attention. Platforms like Blur use point systems to purchase attention; exchanges invest real money to build MCN-style agencies around KOLs. This is the Pinduoduo + TikTok combination strategy, perfectly executed in the cryptocurrency realm. Compared to founders attending conferences and pitching technology, this new approach seems more direct and effective.
Undoubtedly, attention is one of the most valuable assets of this era, but difficult to measure. Kaito is trying to quantify it. Although Yap-to-Earn is not new - SocialFi tried it long ago - Kaito adds AI-driven innovation, claiming to assess the "value" of information and quantify influence. However, this model cannot capture long-term value. Tokens are becoming fast-consumption goods.
We have all experienced the drawbacks of three-stage point systems, and I have previously analyzed Blur's impact. If future projects rely on attracting attention, it's hard to say whether it's right or wrong. Radical marketing strategies are not inherently shameful. But the entire ecosystem seems to be sliding towards a culture of inflation. The old cryptocurrency era is truly ending. Monetizing influence has now become a mature business - whether for US presidents, Binance, or today's internet celebrities. None of this can bring long-term prosperity. Everyone is just grabbing what they need.
Conclusion
Stablecoins are going global. Blockchain-based payments are inevitable. But the natives of this field may not need these. What we need are truly on-chain native stablecoins, non-financial use cases, and the next wave of genuine innovation. We do not want to live in a Web3 era built entirely around monetizing traffic.
Time will prove that some Bitcoin pioneers were not wrong. However, I still hope they are wrong.
