Foresight published a market analysis arguing that the crypto ecosystem has seen a sharp drop in new projects that are original, crypto-native, and capable of sustaining long-term development.
The piece opens with a comment from a longtime reader. That reader said the author’s articles over the past one to two years seemed less carefully written and speculated that the process may have involved drafting an outline and letting AI finish the piece. The reader added that, while the views still felt like the author’s own, they no longer carried the same sincerity and edge as before. The comment also said the reader had followed the author’s Ximalaya programs from 2018 through 2022 and felt the earlier work was still very sharp, even if the tone appeared restrained on the surface. The reader then suggested that after the 2021 bull market, financial freedom may have made the author more relaxed in writing.
The author rejects AI use and addresses the change in tone
The author thanked that longtime reader and other readers for years of interaction, sharing, and discussion, then responded directly to the AI point. According to the article, the current work is still written entirely by hand, without any AI tools used for polishing language, planning topics, or shaping ideas.
The author said the goal is to keep writing in a fully original way even in the AI era. On the reader’s suggestion about financial freedom, the author said that is still a work in progress. The biggest wish, the article said, is to see what the author’s holdings, whether in stocks or crypto, will become in 20 years.
The author also said the issue of articles feeling less sharp had already been noticed some time ago and had come up in conversations with friends. The article says several pieces will be used to share those changes in feeling and perspective over the years.
Main argument: too few sustainable, original crypto-native projects
The core claim is that the strongest feeling in recent years has been the shortage of new, original, native crypto projects that also have sustainable development potential. The author wrote that readers who have followed the crypto ecosystem for a long time should be able to feel that change as well.
If there is one newer source of momentum and storytelling over the past year into this year, the author said, it is RWA, especially tokenized stocks.
RWA is one of the few fresh themes, but feels less native
Even so, the article says many of those projects are planned and controlled by institutions. In the author’s view, that leaves them with too little of crypto’s native flavor. The style and approach of those participants, the piece argues, still carry a traditional and conservative feel, with discussions repeatedly circling back to compliance and regulation.
The author made clear that this is not an argument against compliance or regulation in themselves. The point, as stated in the article, is that when a new technology and a new wave are emerging, rough-edged innovation should move first, rather than having regulation and compliance become the main focus before the thing itself has even fully appeared.
For that reason, the author said projects led or dominated by institutions are far less attractive than native ones.
Beyond PONS, there is little left to write about
The article says the market is not entirely without crypto-native projects. It points to projects like PONS as examples that still feel native to crypto. But the author added that their staying power remains to be seen, and there are still too few angles to write about in depth.
Once those are set aside, the author said, what remains to write about is basically Bitcoin and Ethereum.
Bitcoin and Ethereum remain central, but no longer feel fresh as subjects
On Bitcoin, the author wrote that there is not much left to say. Occasional responses to criticism are, in the author’s words, mostly educational material and repeated explanations of familiar points.
On Ethereum, the author said the stance has not changed and has in fact become more optimistic over time. Many events that others see as major waves affecting Ethereum are described in the article as minor ripples that are not worth much concern. So even when the author writes about Ethereum from time to time, the piece says it often amounts to making the same argument again under a different label.
The author compared that feeling to a line from Duan Yongping on Apple: 「What is there to look at in Apple’s earnings?」 The article says the author does not understand Apple and has never bought Apple stock, but strongly relates to the sentiment. That same feeling is then applied to crypto’s two largest assets: what is there left to write about in Bitcoin and Ethereum?
Interest and inspiration are close to exhaustion
The article closes by saying that, after counting through the available themes one by one, the projects and ideas in crypto that can still trigger strong interest and excitement have become almost exhausted.
A disclaimer at the end says markets carry risk and investment requires caution. The article does not constitute investment advice, and readers should decide for themselves whether any opinions, views, or conclusions fit their own circumstances and bear responsibility for any investment decisions made on that basis.
