People sometimes ask me what my vision of DeFi is. This is a very tough question. DeFi is very messy with thousands of experiments happening. But high level, I think DeFi will go through 2 phases:

During the 1st phase (next 2-5 years), we'll continue to build games, casinos, and speculative products.
This sounds uninspiring. But it has two main important consequences.

1) This will ultimately lead to hundreds of millions of users to install wallets and get uncomfortable with the UX.

2) This will force the tech (especially scaling) to mature.
Once we've achieved these two goals, phase 2 begins. In phase 2, products that serve real economic activities / integrated with the real economy will be built and flourish.
Right now, such products barely exist. @terra_money comes to mind. But this is the kind of products that I really look forward to. They are more economically sustainable, and create more value.
In a way, we saw the same 2 phases with #BTC. In the early days, BTC was primarily a speculative asset. Nowadays, it still is, but it's transitioning into the 2nd phase where it's considered an 'emerging store of value'.
Matter of fact, arguably the most important component of capital markets is lending / credit / fixed income. In TradFi, this function is largely manipulated by central banks. In DeFi, it's driven by speculative activities aka phase 1.
In hindsight, phase 1 has also played a critical role in bootstrapping the lending / credit / fixed income market in DeFi. This will pave the way for phase 2.
Moreover, in phase 2, I don't expect DeFi to become a 'parallel financial system'. Instead, I expect traditional financial services companies to build their products in DeFi. Just like traditional media companies moved their business onto the Internet.
If 'the Internet' existed before 'finance' did, I think that's exactly how finance would've been built. On open protocols. Rather in wall gardens.

At the end of phase 2, the 'De' in DeFi will just be removed, and it will just be 'finance'.

More from Tech

So we had to develop technologies like this to barely manage control over limited areas in Iraq's few urban centers. Only ~8 in 100 Iraqi adults owns a personal vehicle. That rate is > 1 car/adult in America yet I have never seen any doctrine paper or work of fiction address this


We've seen and struggled in civil conflicts with instant, local, universal, distributed communications (cell phone era, basically every conflict since 2000). We've seen and struggled in conflicts with instant, global, universal distributed communications (everything since 2011).

The world's most overfunded military and glow in the dark agencies struggle and largely fail to contain conflicts where fhe vast, vast majority of people are locked into a ~5mi radius of their home.

How can they possibly contain a conflict in a nation with universal car ownership and the most developed road network in the world? The average car can travel over 400 miles on one tank of gas, how can you contain the potential of that kind of mobility?

I think that's partially why the system was so freaked out by 1/6. Yes, most of it is histrionics but you don't decide to indefinitely turn your capital into the Baghdad Green Zone with fortifications and 25k troops over histrionics alone.

You May Also Like