This article aims to highlight and propose to the reader a series of considerations regarding the pronounced tendency of emerging technologies to converge, as if by natural law, towards a clear interpretative dichotomy. There is often a common thought that tends to see only black and white, ignoring the infinite shades of gray surrounding a certain subject.
By focusing on the innovations related to blockchain technology and the recent impact of certain events on public opinion, such as the perceived global recession concerning numerous cryptocurrencies and various scandals related to the questionable conduct of some exchanges or trading platforms, the main objective of the argument will be to provide examples and counter-proposals. These can serve as a useful guide for everyone, in order to clarify and understand how potential threats implicit in a certain technology, if critically examined, can transform into significant opportunities.
Let’s take notice. Today, practically everyone uses a smartphone, a tool that until a few years ago was considered, just like the early personal computers of the mid-1980s, a devilry for insiders only. Yet, despite the undeniable prevalence of such commonly used technological devices, we often hear phrases like: “For heaven’s sake, don’t talk to me about technology. We have forgotten how to be together. Everything is virtual now, we no longer meet in person. They steal your money online. Better to stick with good old cash under the mattress…” And so on.
Why does all this happen? Paradoxically, the answer is quite simple. The average user (and unfortunately, in Italy, there are many people who lack the basics of computer science and English, the recognized language of technology) of any technology on the market today presumes that they can use it without any knowledge of it. Faced with the problems that can arise from this “instinctive use,” the possible reaction is not directed against their own superficiality or naivety, but against the technology itself. It becomes an easy scapegoat to vent their daily frustrations, especially after a malfunction.
Technology, on the other hand, regardless of its level of complexity or historical context, has always been a neutral entity. Depending on the cases (and the users, clients, or dictators of the moment), it can convey both the best and the worst that humanity has been able to express. After all, the sale of simple kitchen knives does not encourage domestic homicides (and it won’t be a remedy like not allowing the free sale of knives but placing them on shelves restricted by security measures that require the intervention of store personnel, as some supermarket chains are doing). Common sense makes us understand that any tool or technology, from steel wire to atomic energy, passing through any possible electronic application, even the seemingly trivial ones, can be used for unethical, criminal, or simply dishonest purposes.
The revolutionary technology of blockchain and its primary applications, with specific reference to the decentralized protocols developed and made available to the general public, is no exception. In fact, in many ways, given its strong connection to the world of economics, finance, and money, it encompasses everything that can potentially generate division within a public debate. It is not surprising, then, that the topic of cryptocurrencies generates an “automatic” rejection in many circles, which is completely incomprehensible to anyone who truly understands the subject matter.
Just as Web1 quickly transformed into Web2 thanks to high-speed connections that spread like wildfire from the early 2000s and is now (perhaps) ready for the leap to Web3 and its innovative solutions, after an initial phase confined to enthusiasts and professionals, the widespread operation of the main fields of decentralized blockchain applications has reached global adoption that each of us sees daily.
The relentless flattening of the learning curve, coupled with a gradual decrease in costs and therefore retail prices of common technological devices, has transformed the world with rather predictable outcomes, both negative (constantly publicized) and positive (all too often silenced).
Focusing on the world of the Web alone, it must be said that despite the relative infrastructural backwardness that persists in certain areas of the planet, including unfortunately within certain countries, it is unquestionable that today practically every human activity is conducted on digital highways, from retail commerce to personal communications, from political propaganda to the creation of multimedia content, not to mention information, marketing, entertainment, the provision of services related to public administration, and even the intricate interactions characteristic of industrial, scientific, logistical, and cultural fields. It is no coincidence that this transformation has put, and continues to put, numerous sectors in crisis, as they strive, sometimes effectively and other times less so, to find a rebirth in the World Wide Web, just as it happened in the past for businesses involved in the rental of the now obsolete VHS format.
On the other hand, in considering the parallel between the development of the internet from its beginnings to the present day, it is worth noting (and many former students from universities such as Ca’ Foscari and Bocconi will remember this) that in the early 2000s, Jeff Bezos’ dream of global commerce through the emerging Amazon platform was considered by a good number of economists and experts in commercial organizations to be little more than folly. As they say, “what goes around comes around.”
It is not surprising, therefore, that in the face of available and now widely adopted technology, even the most significant scams are now being carried out through the mediation of the internet, as a natural and inevitable adaptation, perpetuating a trail of naivety and recklessness that each of us should guard against through the development of good habits in terms of security and privacy.
Parallel to this, it is not surprising that a technology like blockchain, whose statistically predominant use is linked, as expected, to cryptocurrency transactions, is heavily involved in ongoing debates about actual frauds, as well as scandals arising from the insolvency of projects, companies, and entities that reach the public through the brutal simplification of the media, often in narrative contexts that generalize and misinform the vast audience.
From this perspective, discussing the flaws of the system is the best way to understand the opportunities it can bring, if one delves into a comprehensive and respectful examination of the objective data.
Why is it important to discuss the potential pitfalls associated with the use of cryptocurrencies and the services connected to them? Perhaps to vehemently and irrevocably condemn them, suggesting a massive return to traditional currency, perhaps in cash, as certain current trends would imply? Certainly not; in fact, it is quite the opposite. Since scammers perpetrate scams, and it is not the potential fraudulent instruments themselves that transform honest citizens into greedy criminals, it is crucial to emphasize that knowledge of the technology in use is essential to protect oneself from any type of danger, fraud, or system vulnerability, and that only patient dissemination efforts can separate the wheat from the chaff, allowing us to understand the great advantages of the token economy and the incredible revolutions that have been implemented, continue to be improved, and applied thanks to its development.
One strong point to emphasize is that, momentarily setting aside heavily profit-oriented attitudes (e.g., high-volume trading, staking of digital assets for interest, etc.) that drive the motivations (legitimate motivations, mind you) of numerous clients, what we call the “blockchain revolution” is primarily about the functional concept of distribution and decentralization, and all the consequences that follow from it.
The projects emerging around the potential of decentralization are as numerous as they are related to well-recognized entities and institutions with high innovative value. From the circular economies proposed by the city of Lugano in its PlanB (a sort of large work in progress to establish a Swiss hub in the crypto field, centered in the city itself) to the adoption of Bitcoin as legal tender (consider not only El Salvador but also the many metropolitan coins that have emerged in cities like Miami and New York), from the crypto-rescue of entire economies devastated by inflation to the growing adoption of blockchain solutions by businesses of all sizes and types, the entire planet now demonstrates in practice that tokenized economy is a reality just around the corner, not a fantasy.
First and foremost, from the perspective of the individual user, this partial or total paradigm shift places the individual at the center of responsibility (towards oneself and others) and the managerial and decision-making power over digital entities we call coins or tokens. Depending on their fungible or non-fungible nature, these tokens represent a true digital version of historically identified assets – mutatis mutandis – in a variety of well-known categories. To name just a few: precious metals (Bitcoin, as well as numerous altcoins with fixed supply and deflationary effects), individual or limited edition artworks (consider the growing market interest in NFTs), assets linked to the value of other goods (such as the wide range of stablecoins available today thanks to smart contracts enabled by “intelligent” networks like Ethereum, Polygon, Solana), as well as all forms of tokenization that currently drive the capitalization of projects that cannot be summarized in a simple article.
In other words, especially if we go back to the pioneering era, almost mythologically embodied by the famous announcement of the mysterious Satoshi Nakamoto regarding the release of the Bitcoin protocol, these technologies implicitly underpin a “libertarian” foundation that can be interpreted differently depending on the needs of specific users. They can manifest in a diverse range of services, not necessarily decentralized. In the face of blockchain and its practical applications, entrepreneurs have seen a business opportunity, ordinary users have seen a way to emancipate themselves from the flaws of a centralized control system, and scammers have seen potential for their scams… The list could go on, encompassing all the good and evil in the world.
It is important to never forget that when transitioning from the realm of impartial algorithms that embody the functionality of a digital wallet to the real world, the commercial and entrepreneurial activities organized “with” and “through” cryptocurrencies (such as exchanges) are still “human” in nature, subject to the rules and challenges typical of any other human-managed activity within traditional and centralized forms of organization. In this case as well, it is not about condemning this practice in favor of its opposite. There will continue to exist and operate perfectly valid, solid, and serious exchanges alongside others that will be forced to close shortly, either due to explosive events like the recent FTX and its administrator Sam Bankman-Fried incident or due to much more mundane dynamics related to common business risks.
In other words, we live in an absolutely hybrid and hyper-connected world, where the most distant past, both the good and the bad, the antiquated and the ones that need to be recovered, interact with the present, demanding a consideration of the future that necessarily must be assessed by the intelligence and competence of individuals, not by the arbitrary dictates of often incompetent journalism or by entities that have a lot to lose, or by other sectors resistant to innovation due to various phenomenological motivations.
Specifically, the technology of distributed decentralization identified by blockchain architectures is currently the most valid algorithmic model in terms of transaction security and transparency for the storage of digital assets. It is built on cryptographic foundations exclusively for the user’s benefit. The cyber attacks that can “breach” a system, outside of proper non-custodial private storage, are exactly the same attacks that can be carried out, in a much larger proportion both statistically and operationally, on a regular credit card.
Keeping in mind the fact that scams and fraud in euros and dollars are still much more numerous than those involving Bitcoin or altcoins, and that the indiscriminate demonization of such technologies often serves specific self-referential purposes, we must consider the timeless principle: “With great power comes great responsibility.” This principle should accompany every step towards the future, regardless of whether it is taken by a global entrepreneur or an ordinary user.
The prevalent culture of the current world, with its endorsements and its often false and superficial battles for freedom, tends to forget, and make others forget, this very concept: responsibility. Alongside the libertarian culture that can and should develop around the idea of the new power that the individual can wield through mass technological revolutions, including the one we are discussing (such as the ability to open a cryptocurrency wallet independently, acting as one’s own bank), a parallel and consequential culture of responsibility that these powers entail must also be spread and encouraged.
The result of this dynamic will lead to the identification of increasingly serious and qualified industry operators who can educate their customers to the best of their abilities, in terms of both autonomy and legitimate defense against the potential pitfalls that the new global scenarios – and globalization itself, now seen as an inevitable dimension – bring with them.
Home
Market and Data
Become an author
Wallet
