We don't want a true crash, but we deserve it. Although it may appear counterintuitive, I believe we require a crypto winter similar to others that have preceded it.

At this stage in a Bitcoin BTC cycle, we begin to see all of the doom and gloom articles and postings about cryptocurrency being a Ponzi scheme. Countries are beginning to proclaim that they will prohibit the use of cryptocurrency. Last year, it was China; this year, it is Russia.

We've read articles about how NFTs are wreaking havoc on the environment. They include soundbites like "a French artist was surprised to hear that their "publication of six crypto-artworks consumed more electricity in 10 seconds than their entire studio over the last two years." These are quite foreboding, yet selective journalism completely misses the mark. We frequently encounter journalists and critics who have just enough technological competence to be dangerous in most media. They will see proof-of-work and proof-of-stake blockchains as interchangeable, or will recognise that some blockchains are proof of stake as a token gesture.

Mainstream articles on blockchain technology or projects built on it are rarely written by people who genuinely understand it. Getting more clicks and, as a result, more advertising money may be a case of going to extremes. There is still a lack of knowledge and comprehension.

Many of the articles written about blockchain now remind me of pieces from before 2000 that frequently appeared on Reddit's Popular tab. Headlines that blasted the internet's endurance or PC power consumption are now amusing to read. "It should come as no surprise to us that people are failing to comprehend the point of the Internet," Jake Wakefield remarked in a Zdnet.com piece in 1999. Do you recognise this? How many times have we heard that NFTs are "simply JPGs that I can save or save to my phone"? Articles discussing the demise of blockchain and, in particular, NFTs will age similarly.

The fact is that blockchain is a difficult technology to grasp. It took me a long time to fully grasp it. I kept forgetting how that pertains to anything other than bitcoin, no matter how many times I read a definition. I recall the first time I read about traditional businesses using blockchain into their technology stacks. It was an article on how Santander investigated the use of blockchain technology in certain aspects of their infrastructure. I couldn't figure out how crypto and IT systems were related... and this from someone with a strong technical and information technology background.

The world will never completely embrace disruptive and revolutionary technologies when they first exist. The majority of people are not actively seeking to comprehend new concepts and ideas. People will only listen for as long as they need to validate their conclusion before beginning to read or listen. We live in a world characterised by widespread illiteracy, impatience, and obstinacy. So, while the internet may have triumphed, that does not necessarily imply that we have. Part of this could be attributed to the severe monopolisation of the media we consume. Few stakeholders stand between us and what we consume, thanks to Facebook and the main networks. We can change this with blockchain.

Blockchain represents a ray of hope for a better world for me. At the moment, a lot of attention is being paid to how crypto may make you rich quickly and easily. Notably, this relates to how many people are desperate to change their circumstances. After the last two years, much of the world is in desperate need of a break, and cryptocurrency appears to be that winning lottery ticket for many. Sadly, this is not the case. Not everyone can win the lottery, and even if they could, the payouts would be insignificant. Many people believe that blockchain, crypto, or meme-coins will instantly improve the lives of individuals who are struggling. It is, however, the start of a decentralised society in which truth, honesty, integrity, and growth can flourish.

Blockchain technology enables the construction of systems that are transparent and verifiable. While many of the most important crypto projects are currently centralised, this is not the case for all of them. It does not, however, imply that all future successful initiatives will be. Ethereum ETH, for example, is already on the path to complete decentralisation. The paper exposes the most serious issue in the decentralisation discussion, which is frequently overlooked. Amazon AWS servers host more than a quarter of Ethereum nodes. For the case for decentralisation, Amazon AWS is the most significant bottleneck, followed by Cloudflare. We should push bare metal techniques to development in the same way that we support decentralisation in blockchain technology. We can't rely on Amazon fully.

Decentralisation opens up a whole new universe of possibilities for technology, the internet, and connectivity. Because of the significance of this upcoming wave of invention, Meta (formerly Facebook) is already trying to gain control of the Metaverse. They realise they can no longer be the technological epicentre. It is simply need to read their website to realise this. Language like "a future created by all of us" and "the metaverse will be a collective endeavour that extends beyond a single firm" are used. They are well aware that decentralisation and blockchain will take over the world, so why are we still debating the purpose of an NFT? The truth is that it marks the beginning of a new era free of the privacy concerns that plagued the first decade of the twenty-first century.

Meta's purpose, I assume, is to establish itself as a hub of connectedness using SSO with Facebook Login. To log into Oculus, you must already have a Facebook account (which will be a Meta account as soon as brand awareness hits its target number). Meta is putting together the resources necessary to acquire Gen Z and Y users through the back door. A 12-year-old cannot have a Facebook account, but they can have an Oculus account. Do we really trust that Meta will not begin tracking their data after they reach the age of 13?

The evolution of Bitcoin can be summed up as follows: Satoshi Nakamoto reveals the Bitcoin whitepaper in 2009. 2011 — Bitcoin forks result in the birth of new cryptocurrency initiatives. Ethereum is released in 2015, as blockchain startups start to develop. 2018 – The total cryptocurrency market cap reaches $820 billion, with Bitcoin's dominance decreasing to 33% from 85% in 2017. 2021 – Bitcoin reaches $67,566 as the whole crypto market worth exceeds $2.9 trillion. Coinmarketcap presently monitors over 17,000 cryptocurrency projects and 450 exchanges.

From here, we can either see the crypto industry collapse and NFT initiatives become completely useless, or we can watch the future begin to take shape. Web 3.0 is still in its early stages, but there are RPC tooling businesses, NFT builders, smart contract generators, and a plethora of other one-of-a-kind and remarkable initiatives that are just getting started. The Ponzi scheme peaked in 2017, and the euphoria peaked in 2021. The base is the tedious part that precedes the real revolution. Developers require suitable tooling to standardise code and development procedures. Instead of focusing on marketing hype or a token's "meme status," we must concentrate on the technology. Crypto appears to have mimicked the game industry's 'pseudo-agile' development model, failing to learn from its shortcomings. Without proper communication, projects are frequently delayed and unrealistic deadlines are met. The 'Crypto-Bro' development mentality, like the advertising-only mentality of dot-com era internet firms, must fade away.

The internet boom of the 1990s was followed by a crash that separated the strong from the weak. The same thing is about to happen in the crypto world. There are far too many get-rich-quick and Ponzi schemes on the market right now. Since 2017, this has been true... Anyone interested in the OneCoin cryptocurrency? However, it is not the technology that is defective. In fact, I believe it is a very positive indicator for the technology. Everyone wants to be a part of it, but not everyone knows why it is going to alter the world. They see the obvious; they understand how to generate money right now. Some crypto initiatives just fork a successful chain and add new branding to it, similar to how vacuous dot-com businesses spend up to 90 percent of their budgets on advertising. This is not an example of creativity. This is an example of opportunism.

However, this is not the point of cryptocurrency and blockchain. Some of us see how we can transform the world tomorrow by giving everyone a voice. It's a long way off, but blockchain is the only way forwards for me. However, we must first clear the path. There are just too many meaningless enterprises. We are obviously trapped in a bubble. Even now, with Bitcoin hovering around $35,000, the overall market capitalisation is more than quadruple what it was just four years ago. The impending crash will affect only those projects that lack the necessary technological foundations. It will pave the way for the project that will serve as the foundation for Web 3.0. Should we thus sell? I can't give you that advise, but I'm personally selecting projects that I believe will have a place after the reset and dollar-cost averaging them.

If we don't see a purging of pointless undertakings, we may be in for a future that demonstrates Idiocracy was simply a documentary that was released too soon...

I'm not sure how to get to a decentralised world where everyone has equal access to possibilities, but the path is clear; crypto alone offers the necessary foundations.

Support us!