> I hear this all of the time, but the people and projects “reshaping the economy and politics” are rarely ever named. There are two good reasons for that: 1)

> I hear this all of the time, but the people and projects “reshaping the economy and politics” are rarely ever named. There are two good reasons for that: 1) The culture around careful discussion of crypto currencies does well to keep seperated financial advice and claims about economics, incentives and technology (or in the crypto space you call of these 'the protocol' or something else to refer to the complete package a distributed ledger technology aims to achieve) - these claims can quickly get mixed up with lies to make money using buzzwords. You don't want this discussion to turn into people shilling what they personally own, trust me, and refraining from naming good projects when off the metaphorical sale's floor is simply good manners. 2) Crypto is still very nascent. Smart contract platforms that are fast and cheap are only starting to be rolled out and stress tested - without that most of the auxiliary functions people envision are only aspirations. If that's where basic smart contracts are right now, then more advanced protocols you can easily tell are much less far along. Because of the lack of industry proven protocols to do what believers pretty much know will happen someday, recommending any means imparting risk on people like you who expect others to tell you "what's up." Its not that fun giving someone risky investment advice when they refuse to look into it themselves and shoulder that risk.