After raising $650 million, Dragonfly believes that crypto is not meant for humans

This article is from: Haseeb Qureshi

Compiled by: Azuma, Odaily Planet Daily

Editor's note: Last night, the leading venture capital firm Dragonfly Capital announced the completion of its fourth fundraise, totaling $650 million.

On the same night, Dragonfly Capital's star partner Haseeb Qureshi published a lengthy article on X titled "Crypto was not made for humans," proposing a new perspective that "cryptocurrency was not created for humans, but should serve AI tokens," and stating that "in 10 years, we may be surprised that humans ever interacted directly with cryptocurrency."

Below is the full text by Haseeb Qureshi, compiled by Odaily Planet Daily.

We are a crypto fund. If anyone should firmly believe in cryptocurrency, it should be us.

However, when we sign an investment agreement with a startup, we are not signing a smart contract, but a legal contract; the startup does the same. Without a legal agreement, both parties would feel uneasy.

Why is that?

We have lawyers, and they have lawyers. We have engineers who can write and audit smart contracts, and they do too. Both sides are mature participants well-versed in crypto technology, yet we still do not trust that smart contracts can be the only binding agreement between us.

I myself come from a software engineering background, but I still trust legal contracts more ------ because if there is a problem with a legal contract, I know a judge will make a reasonable ruling, whereas the EVM will not.

In fact, even when there is a "vesting" contract for on-chain tokens, there is usually a corresponding legal contract. This is just in case.

When I first entered the crypto industry, people told a fantastical story: cryptocurrency would replace the property rights system. We would no longer use legal contracts, but only smart contracts; we would no longer rely on courts to enforce agreements, but on code.

But that did not happen. Not because the technology is unworkable, but because this technology is not suited for our society.

I have been in this industry for ten years, and I still feel scared every time I sign a large on-chain transaction, but I never feel fear when making a large bank wire transfer.

The banking system, though flawed, is designed for humans. It is hard to mess up. There are no address poisoning attacks in banks, and it is nearly impossible for a bank to allow me to transfer $10 million to North Korea ------ but for an Ethereum validator, if my address sends $10 million to a North Korean address, there is no reason not to execute it.

The banking system is specifically designed to address human weaknesses and failure modes, and it has been refined over hundreds of years. The banking system is adapted to humans, but cryptocurrency is not.

That is why in 2026, blind signing transactions, legacy authorizations, and accidental phishing contracts are still frightening. We currently know we should verify contracts, double-check domain names, and scan for address spoofing… We know we should do this every time, but we don’t, because we are human.

That is the key. This is why cryptocurrency always feels a bit awkward. Long and unreadable crypto addresses, QR codes, event logs, gas fees, and ubiquitous pitfalls ------ none of these align with our intuition about money.

At that moment, I realized ------ because cryptocurrency was never made for us.

Crypto is made for machines

AI agents do not slack off or get tired. They can verify transactions, check every domain, and audit contracts in seconds.

More importantly, AI agents trust code more than law. I trust law over smart contracts, but for AI agents, legal contracts are actually more unpredictable.

Think about it, how would I drag my counterparty to court? In which jurisdiction will this contract be adjudicated? What if the legal precedent is ambiguous? Who will serve as the judge or jury? The law is full of uncertainties, and the outcomes of edge cases are hard to determine, while dispute resolution often takes months or even years. This is generally acceptable for humans, but on the time scale of AI agents, that is almost eternity.

Code, on the other hand, is closed-form, deterministic, and verifiable. If an AI agent wants to reach an agreement with another agent, it can negotiate terms on a smart contract, perform static analysis, and formal verification, entering into a binding agreement ------ all of this happens in minutes, while humans are still asleep.

From this perspective, cryptocurrency is a self-consistent, fully readable, and completely deterministic system of monetary property rights. This is everything that an AI financial system needs. What we see as "rigid traps" in human eyes, AI sees as well-written specifications.

Even legally, our traditional monetary system is designed for humans, not AI. The traditional monetary system only recognizes humans, businesses, and governments as legitimate holders of money. If you are not one of these three entities, you cannot own money.

Even if you set up an AI agent to interact with a bank account on your behalf, then what? How do you conduct anti-money laundering (AML) checks, suspicious activity reports, and compliance sanctions on the AI agent? If the agent acts autonomously, where does the liability lie? If it is manipulated, does the liability change?

We haven't even begun to answer these questions ------ our legal system is completely unprepared to welcome non-human financial participants.

Cryptocurrency does not need to answer these questions. A wallet is just a wallet; it is merely code. An agent can hold funds, transact, and enter economic agreements as easily as sending an HTTP request.

"Autonomous" wallets

That is why I believe the future of crypto interfaces will be what I call "autonomous" wallets ------ completely mediated by AI.

You will no longer need to visit websites everywhere. You will instruct your AI agent to solve financial problems for you, and it will navigate the available services (like Aave, Ethena, BUIDL, or any protocols inheriting them) to build the right financial solutions for you. You will not do it yourself; an AI agent with a deep understanding of this world will do it for you. When AI agents become the primary interface to the crypto world, the way these protocols market themselves and compete with each other will fundamentally change.

In addition to acting on your behalf, agents will also trade with each other. When agents can autonomously discover other agents and enter economic agreements, they will prefer cryptocurrency. Because cryptocurrency can operate 24/7, peer-to-peer, exists in virtual space, cannot be shut down, and has complete self-sovereignty…

Odaily Note: An AI agent on Moltbook inquires how to find and interact with other Web3 agents.

This is already happening. Agents on Moltbook are crossing regions to find each other and collaborate, with no one knowing who their owners are or where they are located.

Just yesterday, Conway Research from 0xSigil has built a batch of autonomous agents that will survive completely autonomously using crypto wallets and strive to earn their own computational costs for survival.

The future will become increasingly strange, and cryptocurrency will be a part of this strange world.

So, what is the conclusion?

I think it is this ------ the places in cryptocurrency that seem to fail, those things that feel like flaws to humans, may in retrospect never have been bugs at all. They simply indicate that humans are not the right users. In 10 years, when we look back, we may be surprised that humans ever "struggled" directly with cryptocurrency.

This change will not happen overnight, but a technology often explodes rapidly when its complementary technology finally arrives. GPS waited for smartphones, TCP/IP waited for browsers. For cryptocurrency, we may have just been waiting for AI agents.