Unresolved issues for BTC and ETH

Author: Prathik Desai Source: Token Dispatch Translation: Shan Ouba, Golden Finance

After listening to the Decentralised.co host's conversation with Multicoin Capital co-founder and managing partner Kyle Samani, I had some new insights.

I've spent countless hours explaining to family and friends why I don't think Bitcoin is a "magic internet currency" bubble about to burst. Ever since I got into crypto, they've assumed I was up to something shady. I tell them that Bitcoin is permissionless—no bank or government can prevent you from using it. I emphasize its fixed supply—no one can quietly dilute its value. I also remind them that it's not controlled by a single authority and can't be used to satisfy political demands—unlike governments that print money at will when they have the upper hand.

This is my fundamental stance when discussing Bitcoin with others. When I heard Kyle Samani drop this line at the end of his show, I immediately thought of this: "Bitcoin and Ethereum don't solve anything." Not "they didn't solve my problem" or "they didn't solve it well," but simply: they didn't solve anything at all. This statement is so impressive because it completely ignores details and context. However, I believe the truth is in the details. When I hear "solving a real problem," I don't think of it as reaching some perfect end state. To me, it means making something possible that was previously impossible, or at least expanding the paths people can take. From this perspective, Bitcoin is a true game-changer—it allows you to store and transfer value without a bank account, and without being arbitrarily issued by a central authority to repay debt. Ethereum allows strangers to execute transactions and coordinate rules using code, without relying on a single company. I know some will argue that these systems are still clunky, expensive, and haven't become everyday tools for billions of people. But that doesn't erase the fact that this possibility exists today, whereas it didn't exist before. This brings up the argument that "Bitcoin is digital gold." I've used it myself—scarcity, durability, freedom from government control. While the analogy holds true to a certain extent, gold's monetary role wasn't inevitable. It was shaped by historical contingencies and circumstances: wars, colonial trade patterns, central bank policies. As Kyle points out, this is history's path dependence. "If you were to restart history in 2024 and assume we still had the fiat currency system we have today, gold wouldn't be a thing at all. Gold is a thing because of its historical significance." — Kyle Similar features don't guarantee similar outcomes. I understand the logic, but I still disagree with the statement that "it doesn't solve any problems." Even strip away all the marketing buzzwords, Bitcoin and Ethereum can still do many things that other assets can't. Bitcoin has already created enormous wealth as an asset with a market capitalization of $2.3 trillion. Ethereum is providing the underlying power for exchanges, lending markets, games, and more. It is even the core operating rails for stablecoins and decentralized physical infrastructure networks (DePINs) - both of which are currently the areas of greatest interest to Kyle and the Multicoin Capital team. Yes, I do believe both BTC and ETH are flawed solutions. Bitcoin's original intended role as a payment system is now often replaced by faster, cheaper rails, such as stablecoins based on Solana or Tron. Ethereum, while open, can still be a maze for newcomers—fees soar, transactions are slow, and the user experience is daunting. But imperfect tools are still useful, and they're precisely the driving force behind the next wave of progress. Ten years after its launch, Ethereum remains the most active and dominant blockchain in terms of developer activity on every continent. This is precisely the point that's easily overlooked in "black-and-white" conclusions. Even if neither asset has fully fulfilled their original mission, they have broadened the design space. Bitcoin's pain points in custody are precisely what's driving the world's innovation for simpler solutions. Ethereum's scaling bottlenecks and governance debates have also prompted developers to build Layer 2 networks, faster Layer 1 chains, and even entirely new architectures. As competition intensifies, Ethereum is forced to rethink and reshape its future course—something Kyle points out is something it's been lacking in the past. The internet began with scratchy dial-up tones, static web pages, and fragile email, before Google Docs and Netflix emerged. Those early tools also didn't solve problems perfectly, but without them, the improvements we take for granted today wouldn't exist. I think of Bitcoin and Ethereum as similar "testbeds." They prove something worth doing, even if it's not perfectly executed. And in the process, they create the possibility for others to do it better. That "someone else" might be Solana, the platform Kyle is betting on, or a network yet to be released. Perhaps this, in turn, will ultimately bring out the best in both Ethereum and Bitcoin. If you want to hear Kyle's perspective on Solana's role in this mission and why he's willing to bet against the status quo, listen to this episode. If only to test your own understanding of "problem solving," it's worth listening to.