I am certain—down to the very last line of code I’ve written—that if you’re still here after all these years in the blockchain space, it isn’t because a token’s price changed your life.
It’s because, at some point, you believed—or still believe—that this could be something bigger than mere speculation.
Let’s put that promise to the test. Not the one found in whitepapers, but the one we make to people who don’t even know what a wallet is.
Three types of people come to blockchain
Some arrive looking for the next "100x" gain. Most of them, honestly. They look to Web3 for what their salaries don't provide.
Others come driven by an idea: the desire to stop depending on a platform that can ban you, freeze your account, or wipe out your work overnight without explanation.
And a small group—one I strive to belong to, however difficult it may be—doesn't come looking for an escape from anything.
They come to build something that an accountant, an artist, or a small business owner can use without ever realizing that blockchain, tokens, or distributed consensus are running underneath.
I am a developer. I’ve spent years building tools to solve real-world problems. I’ve created software for people who don’t want to talk about technology, but rather solve the challenges of their daily lives.
And something that has deeply shaped me is building from Cuba—a place where technology often doesn't arrive under the same conditions as it does in other countries.
Here, you learn a lesson quickly:
Innovation doesn't always emerge where resources are most abundant. Often, it arises where the need is greatest.
Technology isn't defined by its promises
I develop software for people who need solutions, not debates about distributed consensus.
And that’s where I learned something that most of these promises don't say out loud:
Technology isn't defined by its promises.
It is defined by what it solves when no one is paying attention to the marketing.
The proof isn't in the whitepaper; it's out on the street
A Cuban accountant managing the books for three or four independent business owners at once doesn't need to know what a smart contract is. They need their tax return to go through correctly and on time, without losing any data if the power goes out or the connection to ETECSA (my country's telecommunications company) fails.
An independent artist uploading music to a platform doesn't need to understand how the underlying distributed storage layer works.
They need their work not to vanish overnight and for their earnings to reach them fairly.
A business owner doesn't want to know which algorithm is running in the background.
They want to save time.
A creator doesn't want to understand the infrastructure.
They want to publish, find an audience, and receive fair, timely compensation.
An average person doesn't want to learn what a private key is.
They want something that works—and if it fails, they don't want to lose everything they have.
The real challenge was never proving that blockchain works.
We’ve known that for years.
The real challenge is getting millions of people to use it without feeling like they’re dealing with something complicated.
And even more importantly: ensuring they truly have control over what the technology promises to give back to them.
What hardly anyone says out loud
Because here’s the uncomfortable truth:
Many platforms that talk about decentralization still rely on centralized decisions to keep running.
Servers, master keys, and governance structures that, in practice, are concentrated in a few hands.
I’m not saying this out of suspicion.
I say it because anyone who has built things on the technical side knows exactly where those points of failure lie, even if the marketing claims otherwise.
I won’t single out specific platforms or names. There’s no need; anyone close to actual development already knows.
But if you ever see a small, useful project disappear for no apparent reason, it’s often not because the technology failed.
It’s because someone, somewhere in the system, had more control than it seemed.
So, should we abandon blockchain?
Not at all.
Just like the early days of the internet—when most projects vanished but a few changed the way we live—blockchain isn't dead.
But it isn't the magic solution some people sell it as, either. What will disappear is the illusion that simply launching a token is enough to change things.
The future won't be built by those who only talk about technology on panels and Twitter Spaces.
It will be built by those who take a real problem—faced by an accountant, an engineer, an entrepreneur, a street vendor, an independent artist, or a small business—and solve it.
Whether it runs on blockchain or not.
Perhaps the next great Web3 application won't be a new currency.
Perhaps it will be a tool so simple that people use it every day without ever wondering what’s running underneath.
And that, I believe, is the only conversation worth having:
Are we building technology to impress one another, or so that someone who has never heard the word "blockchain" can live a little better because of it?
