Written on the UAE-Oman border: Survival lessons for the crypto natives after navigating through gunfire.

Author: Brother Bing , co-founder of MegaETH

Compiled by: Yuliya, PANews

Having personally experienced the Middle East conflict and witnessed the awe-inspiring spectacle of missiles flying everywhere, the author has gained a new understanding of the fundamental relationship between "technology and civilization." The article delves into the technological details of war, pointing out that technology often merely acts as an "amplifier" of civilization's trajectory, and drawing parallels to the current internal conflicts within the crypto space. The author calls on crypto natives to rediscover their cyberpunk roots, rejecting the mere pursuit of "legitimacy" from traditional finance, and recommitting to building truly sovereign infrastructure.

The full text is as follows:

I am writing and publishing this article after crossing the border between the UAE and Oman. The entire crossing process took about an hour and was incredibly smooth.

Over the past 48 hours, I've been utterly stunned by the technology involved in this war. This is the first time in my life I've witnessed missiles firsthand and watched interceptor systems destroy them in mid-air. I've also come across some surreal, geeky, and even bizarre details, such as reports that Israel hacked a prayer app to send messages to Iranians.

I've always worked in the tech industry, but this was my first time experiencing a defense system firsthand, and it gave me a completely new perspective on the relationship between technology and civilization . Technology can create the illusion that it can upgrade civilization; but in reality, it merely amplifies the predetermined course of civilization's development, much like leveraged trading. (Don't despair yet!) Let me explain.

Technology is an amplifier of the civilization cycle.

In a healthy cycle of civilizational advancement, technology becomes a booster of productivity and a coordinating tool. The early internet evoked this feeling. I still remember using various forums 17 years ago when applying to American universities in Beijing: strangers selflessly sharing advice, essays, and strategies. Back then, the concept of a "closed API" was unheard of.

But in a downturn, technology becomes something else entirely. It becomes a weapon for attention (and sometimes a truly lethal one!). My 60-year-old parents are more prone to binge-watching negative videos than I am, and many of my millennial friends are deeply concerned about this. The same internet that once gave us access to open knowledge is now fostering algorithmic addiction.

This framework beautifully explains the inner turmoil felt by most crypto natives today. It feels like cryptocurrency was invented for the world we live in now, yet everyone is disappointed.

So, what exactly happened?

Many industry veterans have discussed whether we've forgotten the spirit of cryptpunks or gotten too close to TradFi, so I won't go into detail here. I'd just like to offer two points for consideration.

Cryptocurrencies should never have been merely an asset class in the first place. As Evgeny writes in *Golden Path*, cryptocurrencies were meant to be a parallel system, a way to restructure finance with fewer boundaries, lower coordination costs, and flexible exit mechanisms.

Then, things changed. “Legitimacy” was presented to us, and it came almost too easily . Once people have tasted the sweetness of legitimacy, they want more. Technology, as an amplifier, naturally seeks the path of least resistance—that is, integration with existing power structures—to further solidify this legitimacy.

To be clear, there's nothing wrong with bringing institutions into blockchain infrastructure. But at some point in the process, we quietly abandoned many of our initial dreams . I find myself increasingly revisiting those early use cases: small-scale unsecured loan experiments, a Tanthi-like syndicated pension structure, and even better ways to save and exchange money across borders.

Stablecoins perfectly embody this paradox. They realize the vision of "internet money," but often merely serve as a better wrapper for sovereign currency rather than a structurally independent monetary system. Incidentally, Mega is also absolutely to blame in this regard. We still have a long way to go.

In my opinion, many of today's successful cases should be called "blockchain," not "cryptocurrency." If the goal is simply to become middleware for traditional finance, that's fine. But we should be honest about what we call it. Backend integration is not the same as radical innovation.

Price is never the real reason for disappointment. The sad reality is that we made the wrong choice between "what we can build" and "what we choose to build."

War and the Revelation of Crypto Natives

Returning to the original question: What lessons did this war teach me about crypto natives?

If we broaden our perspective, civilizations do indeed have cycles. As a Chinese person, I grew up listening to stories of dynastic changes. But in all those stories about emperors, generals, and rebels, what ultimately shines is the individual will.

I don’t know how else to put it, but crypto natives will never win by being “likable”.

Our initial success stemmed from our continuous efforts to identify and publicly criticize the flaws in the old system. However, for some reason, dissenting voices were suppressed during the development process.

In a downturn, technology can easily amplify financialization, market manipulation, and superficial growth. However, it is far more difficult to use technology to quietly build seemingly mundane infrastructure that extends true sovereignty.

However, builders can still choose which incentives to include in the code. Founders can still decide which use cases to prioritize. More importantly, the community can still choose which values ​​to uphold.

If societal sentiments gravitate towards insecurity and a search for validation, technology amplifies that insecurity . However, if enough people consciously anchor themselves to long-term structures, to tools of coordination rather than attention traps, then leverage may still work in our favor.

My decision to cross the border into Oman wasn't met with much approval from my friends. They told me it was chaotic there, the border crossings were unpredictable, and I'd be better off staying put. However, I wouldn't know if those claims were true until I saw it for myself (and Dubai is quite comfortable for most people, including myself). It turned out the border was very quiet, almost deserted, and the whole process was very easy.

The world is not currently in our favor, but in the long run, it is likely to be in our best interest.

For us crypto natives, it's never too late to reposition ourselves, verify things for ourselves, choose to do the right thing, and, in the oldest parlance, to forge a parallel path.

As my favorite YouTuber said: You might have a very sharp knife, but if the person wielding it is a coward, nothing will happen. Let's sharpen our knives. Let's not be cowards.