[Editorial] Is Cryptocurrency Designed for Humanity

Is cryptocurrency truly a technology designed for humanity?

This question is uncomfortable. But looking back over the past decade, it’s hard to ignore. We have dedicated efforts to popularize blockchain, improve user experience, simplify wallets, and hide gas fees. Yet, many still say, “It’s too difficult.”

Perhaps the issue isn’t a lack of user understanding, but the very starting point of its design.

Banks are inefficient. Transfers are slow, fees are high, and processes are complicated. But people still use banks because there are mechanisms to recover from mistakes and responsible entities. It’s a system based on human imperfection.

And what about blockchain? A single wrong character in an address can lead to permanent loss. Transactions cannot be undone. Rules are cold and ruthless. Is this structure truly designed with humans at the center?

Look at it from another perspective. A deterministic, rule-based system with zero tolerance for errors—who is it optimized for? Humans or machines?

AI agents are not burdened by complex wallet addresses. They can quickly verify smart contracts and automatically execute transactions that meet certain conditions. They won’t be fooled by phishing links. Structures inconvenient for humans might be natural environments for machines.

So, another question arises. Is the traditional financial system ready to accept AI agents? Opening a bank account requires an individual or legal entity. AI is neither. It doesn’t have the institutional status to hold assets or sign contracts.

On-chain, a wallet is code. Signatures matter more than identity. AI agents can move assets and execute contracts without approval processes or business hours. Blockchain may be unfamiliar to humans, but for machines, could it be a more natural stage?

Here, another hypothesis is proposed. Is cryptocurrency not meant to spread as a consumer product, but to permeate as infrastructure? The popularity of stablecoins and tokenized real assets might not be just a trend but a signal of a shift in financial pipelines. This means the change isn’t superficial applications but the underlying structure.

Future users may not choose to interact directly with chains. They will simply give commands: “Pay this invoice,” “Reallocate assets.” In between, AI agents will design the optimal path. Users only need to confirm the results. Isn’t this scene exactly how blockchain, as “invisible infrastructure,” establishes its position?

In the early days of the internet, the public didn’t understand TCP/IP either. But once user-friendly services layered on top of the protocol, the internet became part of daily life. Is blockchain following the same path?

Cryptocurrency may not be originally designed for humans. But it is precisely this characteristic that could become the foundation for it to provide new utility to humans through machines.

The issue isn’t whether the technology is right or wrong. It’s about what assumptions we are using to view this technology right now.