Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

How Bitcoin’s Shift to Digital Gold Was Fueled by Institutions

Published

on

How Bitcoin’s Shift to Digital Gold Was Fueled by Institutions

Bitcoin, and eventually broader crypto, was steered away from being a decentralized alternative to the state and toward integration into the very financial system it was meant to replace.

In an interview, Aaron Day, co-founder of Daylight Freedom, a foundation dedicated to financial sovereignty and individual liberty, reached this conclusion based on his personal experiences with Bitcoin. 

Questioning Bitcoin’s Original Mission

Nowadays, Bitcoin is best known for its non-sovereign, censorship-resistant characteristics. For several years now, the crypto community has touted the asset as akin to gold, albeit digital. 

Advertisement

Day, an outspoken critic of cryptocurrencies and a libertarian thinker, once thought this too. 

That’s why he started using Bitcoin as early as 2012. However, he soon started to realize that its narrative was in a constant state of transformation– one that parted ways with its self-proclaimed decentralized nature.

His persistent remarks on social media and sharp criticisms of some of the industry’s most powerful companies have inevitably made some paint him as a conspiracy theorist. 

However, his long trajectory as a crypto user in the space, paired with the research he conducts as a fellow at the Brownstone Institute, provides a perspective that’s hard to dismiss, especially amid Bitcoin’s broader mainstream adoption.

Advertisement

New Hampshire as a Bitcoin Testing Ground

When Day, a New Hampshire resident, started using Bitcoin 15 years ago, many restaurants and shops accepted it directly. It already functioned as a spendable digital currency. 

In many ways, the state was a breeding ground for this type of activity. 

Known as the “Live Free or Die” region, New Hampshire also became the home of the Free State Project, a nonprofit political migration movement founded in 2001 that successfully relocated roughly 20,000 free thinkers to the area, aiming to concentrate them in a low-population state.

Day was the Chairman of that project, and by virtue of his beliefs, he became attracted to Bitcoin’s potential.

“Back [in 2012], mostly conferences were about how Bitcoin was going to be used as an alternative to central banks, how it was going to be something that solved the problem of the 2008 financial crisis, [and] how it was going to be a tool that didn’t require intermediaries or third parties. This is how I got introduced to it,” Day told BeInCrypto during a podcast episode. 

However, despite its early adoption in his city, the narrative began to shift by 2017. According to him, it soon became unusable. 

“All of a sudden, the fees went through the roof. We went from transactions being finalized in seconds to days. It lost its fundamental utility, which is to be something that anyone anywhere in the world could engage in voluntary transactions without third parties,” he added.

Though that was Day’s original frustration with the currency, it soon only represented the tip of the iceberg.

Advertisement

A Narrative Shift From Cash to Store of Value

When Day started using Bitcoin, it was seen as just another form of currency for everyday transactions with decentralized advantages. It was never perceived as anything else. 

“People weren’t talking about primarily as being digital gold. It’s something you just hold and save and don’t spend. It’s not in the title of the whitepaper, this is not the behavior and function of Bitcoin,” he explained.

These changes coincided with the rise of Layer 2 solutions in crypto. These secondary protocols, built on top of the primary blockchain, are designed to significantly increase transaction speeds and reduce fees. Protocols like Segregated Witness (SegWit) and Lightning Network became particularly popular at the time. 

While many developers argued these upgrades were necessary technical trade-offs, Day interpreted them differently. 

In his view, the technical debate around scaling was inseparable from a broader structural shift happening behind the scenes — one related to who was funding Bitcoin’s development.

Advertisement

From Non-Profit Backing to Institutional Influence

In 2012, the Bitcoin Foundation, a non-profit organization, was established in the United States to promote Bitcoin use and protect the integrity of the project. It also supported Bitcoin’s earliest core developers. 

Three years later, however, the organization collapsed amid internal turmoil and financial difficulties. 

Shortly afterward, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Media Lab, through its Digital Currency Initiative —directed by Jeffrey Epstein-linked Joi Ito— began funding several Bitcoin core developers.

Current staff at the MIT Media Lab Digital Currency Initiative. Source: MIT.

To many in the ecosystem, this was a practical solution. Bitcoin was an open-source protocol without a formal corporate sponsor. Developers needed funding to continue their work.

But for Day, the timing raised questions.

Advertisement

“MIT took over, and then some of the same developers that were working on things like SegWit and Lightning Network, essentially hobbling Bitcoin as peer-to-peer cash and moving to this Bitcoin is digital gold narrative.”

As Bitcoin’s scalability issues became more apparent and the network’s future development was increasingly steered by well-funded institutional interests, the project’s decentralized nature began to erode.

Fast forward to today, and Bitcoin has become extensively integrated in infrastructure directly tied to traditional, centralized banking. Exchange-traded funds tied to the asset, institutional custody, and nation-state reserves have since entered the conversation. 

Day questioned whether this trajectory was inevitable or the result of structural forces that redirected Bitcoin’s original mission. 

“I think at the end of this, the longer it goes on, the more it’s pretty clear that all of crypto has been hijacked,” he concluded. 

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Aave’s TVL Falls $8B After $293M Kelp DAO Hack

Published

on

Aave’s TVL Falls $8B After $293M Kelp DAO Hack

Total value locked on decentralized lending protocol Aave dropped by nearly $8 billion over the weekend after hackers behind the $293 million Kelp DAO exploit borrowed funds on Aave, leaving roughly $195 million in “bad debt” on the protocol and triggering withdrawals.

Data from DeFiLlama shows that Aave’s TVL fell from about $26.4 billion to $18.6 billion by Sunday, losing the top spot as the largest DeFi protocol. 

Aave v3’s lending pools for USDt (USDT) and USDC (USDC) are now at 100% utilization, meaning that more than $5.1 billion worth of stablecoins cannot be withdrawn until new liquidity arrives or borrows are repaid. 

$2,540 is available to be withdrawn from the $2.87 billion USDT pool on Aave v3 at the time of writing. Source: Aave

Aave’s TVL fall shows how rapidly risk from a single security incident can spread throughout the broader, interconnected DeFi lending market, potentially leading to a severe liquidity crisis.

The incident began on Saturday when hackers stole 116,500 Kelp DAO Restaked ETH (rsETH) tokens worth about $293 million from Kelp DAO’s LayerZero-powered bridge and used them as collateral on Aave v3 to borrow wrapped Ether (wETH).

Advertisement

Crypto analytics platform Lookonchain said the move created about $195 million in “bad debt” on Aave, which contributed to the Aave (AAVE) token tanking nearly 20% from $112 on Saturday at 6:00 pm UTC to $89.5 about 25 hours later. 

Lookonchain noted that some of the largest crypto whales to withdraw funds from Aave were the MEXC crypto exchange and Abraxas Capital at $431 million and $392 million, respectively.

Source: Grvt

Several crypto networks and protocols tied to rsETH or the LayerZero bridge have paused use of the bridge until the problem is resolved, including DeFi platform Curve Finance, stablecoin issuer Ethena and BitGo’s Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC).

Aave has frozen several rsETH, wETH markets

Shortly after the Kelp DAO exploit, Aave said it froze the rsETH markets on both Aave v3 and v4 to prevent any suspicious borrowing and later stated that rsETH on Ethereum mainnet remains fully backed by underlying assets.

WETH reserves also remain frozen on Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base, Mantle and Linea, Aave said.

Advertisement

This incident marks the first significant stress test of Aave’s “Umbrella” security model, which was introduced in June 2025 to provide automated protection against protocol bad debt while enabling users to earn rewards.

Related: Aave DAO backs V4 mainnet plan in near-unanimous vote

Earlier this month, the Bank of Canada found that Aave avoided bad debt in its v3 market by using overcollateralization, automated liquidations and other strategies that shifted risk to borrowers.

In comments to Cointelegraph, Aave defended its liquidation-based model, framing it as a core safety mechanism that protects lenders while limiting downside for borrowers.

Advertisement

It comes as Aave parted ways with its longest-standing DeFi risk service provider, Chaos Labs, on April 6, following disagreements over the direction of Aave v4 and budget constraints.

Magazine: Are DeFi devs liable for the illegal activity of others on their platforms?