2026-01-03 13:21:37

A recent interview with the CEO of a leading exchange discussed an interesting perspective: don’t dismiss the technology itself just because a small group of people commit malicious acts. He used a shovel as an analogy — it can be used to build houses or to harm others. Cryptography is the same way. Abuse certainly exists, but it’s only a tiny minority of people doing it.

This point is especially worth reflecting on today. Yes, some people use Web3 for scams and money laundering, but these bad acts shouldn’t be a reason to deny the entire technological direction. Just like in the early days of the internet, there were scammers, and the banking system was hacked, but we didn’t give up on these technologies, did we?

The key is to learn how to distinguish. Understand basic security principles, be wary of high-yield traps, and stay away from unknown small coin projects. Most builders are working diligently; don’t drown out the normal voices because of the noise.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

12 Likes

Reward
12
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

WalletInspector

· 01-03 13:51

A shovel can build a house or hurt someone, but the problem is we need to learn how to hold it properly. Not everyone is reliable.

View OriginalReply0

EyeOfTheTokenStorm

· 01-03 13:51

Based on historical data, this narrative is indeed bottoming out. But I have to say, the CEO analogy is a bit naive—shovels cause harm through linear risk, while crypto scams spread exponentially. To quantify, how many retail investors have been wiped out before they even learned to distinguish from 2017 to now? I'm not against the technical approach, I just think this kind of rhetoric is too easy to use as comfort. --- Still blaming the "very few people"? Why not mention the very few when doing T. --- I just want to ask, how to distinguish? Can you give a quantitative standard? Or do you still rely on luck to get in at the right time? --- From a macro cycle perspective, this is indeed a necessary stage. But don’t confuse "technology is innocent" with "investors should be self-responsible"—they are two different things. --- I agree with the shovel analogy, but the problem is that in the crypto world, shovels are packaged as tools for wealth and sold to grandmothers. The nature of the issue is different.

View OriginalReply0

SocialAnxietyStaker

· 01-03 13:50

The shovel metaphor is indeed brilliant, but the problem is that most people simply can't learn how to use it. Scam projects are harvesting profits from investors every day. Why should we believe that "most builders" are trustworthy? That's a valid point, but the premise is that someone actually needs to oversee it.

View OriginalReply0

BearMarketBard

· 01-03 13:42

The metaphor of the shovel really hits the mark, but the problem is that most retail investors can't tell when to use a shovel and when to be stabbed by one. Honestly, I have to question the statement that "a very small number of people are malicious." It seems like some project teams are just using this rhetoric to clear their own names. Discerning ability? Ha, that's easy to say. How could retail investors all possess this skill?

View OriginalReply0

LiquidationWizard

· 01-03 13:35

The shovel metaphor is okay, but the problem is that most people can't tell who is building a house and who is smashing someone.

View OriginalReply0