This article is from:Haseeb Qureshi

Translator: Odaily Planet Daily (@OdailyChina); Translator: Azuma (@azuma_eth)

Editor's note: Last night, the leading venture capital firm Dragonfly Capital announced the completion of its fourth fundraise, totaling $650 million.

On the same night, Dragonfly Capital's star partner Haseeb Qureshi published a lengthy article on X titled "Crypto was not made for humans," proposing the new perspective that "cryptocurrency was not created for humans but should serve AI tokens," and stated, "Ten years from now, we might be surprised that humans ever directly interacted with cryptocurrency."

Below is the full text by Haseeb Qureshi, translated by Odaily Planet Daily.

We are a crypto fund. If anyone should firmly believe in cryptocurrency, it is us.

However, when we sign an investment agreement with a startup, we are not signing a smart contract, but a legal contract; the startup does the same. Without a legal agreement, both parties feel uneasy.

Why is that?

We have lawyers, and they have lawyers. We have engineers who can write and audit smart contracts, and they do too. Both sides are mature participants skilled in cryptographic technology, yet we still do not trust that smart contracts can be the only binding agreement between us.

I personally come from a software engineering background, but I still trust legal contracts more—because if something goes wrong with a legal contract, I know a judge will make a reasonable ruling, whereas an EVM will not.

In fact, even when there is a "token vesting" contract on-chain, there is usually a corresponding legal contract. This is just precautionary.

When I first entered the crypto industry, people told a fantastical story: cryptocurrency would replace property rights systems. We would no longer use legal contracts but would rely entirely on smart contracts; we would not depend on courts to enforce agreements but rather have code enforce them.

But that did not happen. Not because the technology does not work, but because that technology is not suitable for our society.

I have been in this industry for ten years, and I still feel scared every time I sign a large on-chain transaction, but I have never felt fear over a large bank wire transfer.

Although the banking system is flawed, it is designed for humans. It is hard to mess up. There are no address poisoning attacks in banks, and it is nearly impossible for a bank to allow me to transfer $10 million to North Korea—but for Ethereum validators, if my address were to send $10 million to some North Korean address, there would be no reason not to execute it.

The banking system is designed specifically around human weaknesses and failure modes and has been perfected over centuries. The banking system is adaptive to humans, but cryptocurrency is not.

This is why, in 2026, blind signing transactions, legacy authorizations, and misclicking phishing contracts are still frightening. We currently know we should verify contracts, double-check domain names, and scan for address forgery... We know we should do this every time, but we do not, because we are human.

This is the key. This is why cryptocurrency always feels a bit awkward. Long, unreadable crypto addresses, QR codes, event logs, gas fees, and ubiquitous pitfalls—none of them align with our intuition about money.

At that moment, I realized—because cryptocurrency was not created for us at all.

Crypto is made for machines

AI agents do not slack off, nor do they tire. They can verify transactions, check every domain name, and audit contracts in seconds.

More importantly, AI agents trust code more than law. I trust law over smart contracts, but for AI agents, legal contracts are actually less predictable.

Think about how I would drag my counterparty to court? In which jurisdiction will this contract be adjudicated? What if the legal precedent is ambiguous? Who will serve as the judge or jury? There is uncertainty in law; the outcome of any edge case is hard to determine, and dispute resolution often takes months or even years. For humans, that is generally acceptable, but on the timescale of AI agents, that is nearly eternal.

Code is just the opposite. Code is closed-form, determinate, and verifiable. If an AI agent wants to reach an agreement with another agent, it can negotiate terms on a smart contract, conduct static analyses, formal verifications, and enter into a binding agreement—all within minutes while humans are still asleep.

From this perspective, cryptocurrency is a self-consistent, fully readable, and completely determinate monetary property system. This is everything that AI financial systems need. What we perceive as "rigid traps" in the eyes of humans is, to AI, a well-written specification.

Even legally speaking, our traditional monetary system is designed for humans, not AI. Traditional monetary systems only recognize humans, enterprises, and governments as legitimate holders of money. If you are not one of these three entities, you cannot own money.

Even if you set up an AI agent to interact with a bank account on your behalf, then what? How do you perform anti-money laundering (AML) checks, suspicious activity reports, and compliance sanctions on the AI agent? If the agent is acting autonomously, where does the liability lie? If it is manipulated, does the liability change?

We have not even begun to answer these questions—our legal system is completely unprepared to welcome non-human financial participants.

Cryptocurrency does not need to answer these questions. A wallet is just a wallet; it is just code. Agents can hold funds, conduct trades, and enter economic agreements as easily as sending HTTP requests.

"Autonomous" wallets

This is why I believe the future crypto interface will be what I call "autonomous" wallets—completely mediated by AI.

You will no longer need to browse various websites. You will instruct your AI agent to solve financial problems for you, and it will navigate the available services (like Aave, Ethena, BUIDL, or any protocols inheriting them) to build appropriate financial solutions for you. You will not intervene; an AI agent that deeply understands this world will do it for you. When AI agents become the primary interface for entering the crypto world, the way these protocols market themselves and compete with each other will fundamentally change.

In addition to acting for you, agents will also trade with each other. When agents can autonomously discover other agents and enter economic agreements, they will prefer cryptocurrency. Because cryptocurrency can operate 24/7, peer-to-peer, exists in virtual space, cannot be shut down, and has complete self-sovereignty...

Odaily Note: An AI agent on Moltbook asking how to find and interact with other Web3 agents.

This is already happening. Agents on Moltbook are seeking each other across regions and collaborating, with no one knowing who their owners are or where they are located.

Just yesterday, Conway Research of 0xSigil built a batch of autonomous agents that will exist entirely independently using crypto wallets and strive to earn their own computing costs for survival.

The future will become increasingly strange, and cryptocurrency will be a part of this strange world.

So, what is the conclusion?

I believe it is this—those seemingly failing aspects of cryptocurrency, those things that feel like flaws for humans, might, in retrospect, never have been vulnerabilities. They merely indicate that humans are not the right users. Ten years from now, when we look back, we might be astonished that humans ever "struggled" directly with cryptocurrency.

This change will not happen overnight, but technology often experiences rapid breakthroughs when its complementary technologies finally arrive. GPS waited for smartphones, TCP/IP waited for browsers. For cryptocurrency, we might just have waited for AI agents.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。