Ever wonder why traditional intermediaries keep existing when the systems they guard are questionable? The agent model in sports raises real questions about player autonomy—but here's what's stranger: we've moved into digital assets like NFT collections, and somehow the pattern repeats. Projects promise direct creator-to-fan connection, yet investors still get caught holding bags. If the old financial world already nickels-and-dimes us through gatekeepers, why should we trust that Web3 alternatives operate differently? The moment money flows, incentives shift. That's the uncomfortable conversation worth having before trusting the next big digital asset push.

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.
  • Reward
  • 3
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
CryptoTarotReadervip
· 9h ago
Honestly, I stopped believing in the Web3 promises a long time ago. It's just the same old story with a different coat... When there's a lot of money involved, the true nature is revealed.
View OriginalReply0
ShibaSunglassesvip
· 9h ago
Honestly, Web3 sounds great in theory, but in the end, it's still a human nature issue... As soon as money comes in, the attitude changes instantly.
View OriginalReply0
ruggedSoBadLMAOvip
· 9h ago
Honestly, that's why I never touch those "revolutionary" Web3 projects again. The scam is just a different disguise to continue harvesting investors.
View OriginalReply0
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
English
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)