This article comes from:Haseeb Qureshi

Translated by: Azuma, Odaily Planet Daily

Editor's note: Last night, the top venture capital firm in the industry, Dragonfly Capital, announced the completion of a $650 million fundraising for its fourth fund.

On the same evening, Dragonfly Capital's star partner Haseeb Qureshi published a long article titled "Crypto was not made for humans" on X, proposing the new perspective that "cryptocurrencies were not created for humans, but should serve AI tokens," adding that "in ten years, we may be amazed that humans still directly interacted with cryptocurrencies."

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

We are a cryptocurrency fund. If anyone should firmly believe in cryptocurrencies, it should be 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 sides would feel uneasy.

Why is this?

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 well-versed in cryptography, but we still do not trust that smart contracts can be our only binding agreement.

I myself come from a software engineering background, but I still have more faith in legal contracts — because if there is a problem with a legal contract, I know that a judge will make a reasonable ruling, but not so with the EVM.

In fact, even in cases where there are "on-chain token vesting" contracts, there is usually a corresponding legal contract. This is just in case.

When I first entered the crypto industry, people were telling a fanciful story: cryptocurrencies would replace the property rights system. We would no longer use legal contracts but rely entirely on smart contracts; we would not depend on courts to enforce agreements, but let code enforce them.

But that hasn’t happened. Not because the technology doesn’t work, but because this technology does not suit 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.

The banking system, though imperfect, 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 dollars to North Korea — but for Ethereum validators, if my address sends 10 million dollars to a certain North Korean address, there is no reason not to execute it.

The banking system is specifically designed to address human vulnerabilities and failure modes, perfected over hundreds of years. The banking system is adapted to humans, but cryptocurrencies are not.

This is why in 2026, blind signing transactions, legacy authorizations, and accidental phishing contracts are still frightening. We currently know that 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 cryptocurrencies always feel a bit off. Long and unreadable crypto addresses, QR codes, event logs, gas fees, and the ever-present hidden dangers — none of this aligns with our intuition about money.

At that moment, it dawned on me — because cryptocurrencies were never meant for us.

Crypto is made for machines

AI agents do not get lazy or tired. They can verify transactions, check every domain name, and audit contracts within seconds.

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

Think about it, how will I drag my counterparty to court? Which jurisdiction will this contract be adjudicated in? What if the legal precedent is ambiguous? Who will serve as the judge or jury? The law is filled with uncertainty, the outcome of any edge case is difficult to determine, and dispute resolution often takes months or even years. This is generally acceptable to humans, but on the time scale of AI agents, that is almost eternity.

Code is the exact opposite. Code is closed-form, deterministic, and verifiable. If an AI agent wants to enter an agreement with another agent, it can negotiate terms in smart contracts, perform static analyses, do formal verification, and arrive at a binding agreement—all of this happens within minutes while humans are still asleep.

From this perspective, cryptocurrencies represent a self-consistent, completely readable, fully deterministic monetary property rights system. This is everything the AI financial system requires. What we see as "rigid traps" in human eyes are, from an AI perspective, well-written specifications.

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

Even if you set up an AI agent to interact with your bank account, then what? How do you conduct anti-money laundering (AML) reviews, suspicious activity reports, and compliance sanctions on the AI agent? If the agent acts autonomously, who is responsible? If it is manipulated, does liability change?

We haven't even begun to answer these questions — our legal systems are completely unprepared to welcome non-human financial participants.

Cryptocurrencies, on the other hand, do not need to address these questions. A wallet is just a wallet; it is simply code. Agents can hold funds, trade, and enter economic protocols as easily as making an HTTP request.

“Autonomous” wallets

That is why I believe the future of crypto interfaces is what I call "autonomous" wallets — fully mediated by AI.

You will no longer need to browse various websites. You will instruct your AI agent to resolve financial issues for you; it will navigate the available services (like Aave, Ethena, BUIDL, or any protocols inheriting them) to construct suitable financial solutions for you. You won’t lift a finger; a well-informed AI agent will do it for you. When the AI agent becomes the primary interface for entering the crypto world, the way these protocols market themselves and compete will also undergo fundamental changes.

Besides acting on your behalf, agents will also trade with each other. When agents can autonomously discover other agents and enter economic agreements, they will prefer cryptocurrencies. Because cryptocurrencies can operate 24/7, peer-to-peer, exist in virtual space, cannot be shut down, and have complete self-sovereignty...

Odaily note: An AI agent on Moltbook inquired how to find other Web3 agents and interact with them.

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

Just yesterday, Conway Research from 0xSigil has built a batch of autonomous agents that will survive completely autonomously using cryptocurrency wallets, striving to earn their own computing costs for subsistence.

The future landscape will become increasingly peculiar, and cryptocurrencies will be a part of this peculiar world.

So, what is the conclusion?

I think it is this — the seemingly failed aspects of cryptocurrencies, those things that feel like flaws to humans, may in retrospect never have been bugs. They simply indicate that humans are not the right users. In ten years, when we look back, we may be amazed that humans ever "struggled" directly with cryptocurrencies.

This change will not happen overnight, but a technology often explodes rapidly when its complementary technologies finally arrive. GPS waited for smartphones, and TCP/IP waited for browsers. For cryptocurrencies, we may have just waited for it to arrive with 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。