We used to build things because we believed in them. Now, we build because someone might buy them. Speculation isn’t just a financial behavior anymore — it’s a cultural operating system. From crypto tokens to content virality to design trends, we live in a world where potential value has replaced real value. Everything is a pre-launch, a teaser, a drop. Even ideas are traded like assets, inflated with hype before they ever mature. Web3 was supposed to decentralize ownership, but what it really decentralized was attention. We all became investors in narratives. Every creator is now a startup; every tweet is an IPO. The new capitalism isn’t about production — it’s about participation in momentum. The problem? Momentum doesn’t create meaning. Design has absorbed this sickness too. Products are released half-finished, optimized for FOMO instead of function. Brands trade authenticity for aesthetics that look “investable.” And creatives — once obsessed with craft — are now caught in loops of engagement farming. It’s not “What did you make?” anymore. It’s “How many noticed before it was over?” Speculation rewards velocity, not vision. It turns creativity into a casino, where we keep betting on our own relevance. Even the language of art has shifted — “drops,” “floor price,” “community alpha.” We stopped talking about what something means and started asking what it’s worth. This economy of anticipation keeps us in a constant state of almost. We’re always on the verge of the next thing — but nothing lands, nothing lingers. Attention, like capital, has become liquidity. To create meaning again, design has to resist this speculative loop. It has to slow down, to reclaim patience as a form of rebellion. The future shouldn’t just be bought early — it should be built deliberately. Because right now, speculation is our culture’s addiction. And the house always wins. Speculation as Culture was originally published in Coinmonks on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this storyWe used to build things because we believed in them. Now, we build because someone might buy them. Speculation isn’t just a financial behavior anymore — it’s a cultural operating system. From crypto tokens to content virality to design trends, we live in a world where potential value has replaced real value. Everything is a pre-launch, a teaser, a drop. Even ideas are traded like assets, inflated with hype before they ever mature. Web3 was supposed to decentralize ownership, but what it really decentralized was attention. We all became investors in narratives. Every creator is now a startup; every tweet is an IPO. The new capitalism isn’t about production — it’s about participation in momentum. The problem? Momentum doesn’t create meaning. Design has absorbed this sickness too. Products are released half-finished, optimized for FOMO instead of function. Brands trade authenticity for aesthetics that look “investable.” And creatives — once obsessed with craft — are now caught in loops of engagement farming. It’s not “What did you make?” anymore. It’s “How many noticed before it was over?” Speculation rewards velocity, not vision. It turns creativity into a casino, where we keep betting on our own relevance. Even the language of art has shifted — “drops,” “floor price,” “community alpha.” We stopped talking about what something means and started asking what it’s worth. This economy of anticipation keeps us in a constant state of almost. We’re always on the verge of the next thing — but nothing lands, nothing lingers. Attention, like capital, has become liquidity. To create meaning again, design has to resist this speculative loop. It has to slow down, to reclaim patience as a form of rebellion. The future shouldn’t just be bought early — it should be built deliberately. Because right now, speculation is our culture’s addiction. And the house always wins. Speculation as Culture was originally published in Coinmonks on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story

Speculation as Culture

2025/10/30 14:46

We used to build things because we believed in them. Now, we build because someone might buy them.

Speculation isn’t just a financial behavior anymore — it’s a cultural operating system. From crypto tokens to content virality to design trends, we live in a world where potential value has replaced real value. Everything is a pre-launch, a teaser, a drop. Even ideas are traded like assets, inflated with hype before they ever mature.

Web3 was supposed to decentralize ownership, but what it really decentralized was attention. We all became investors in narratives. Every creator is now a startup; every tweet is an IPO. The new capitalism isn’t about production — it’s about participation in momentum.

The problem?

Momentum doesn’t create meaning. Design has absorbed this sickness too. Products are released half-finished, optimized for FOMO instead of function. Brands trade authenticity for aesthetics that look “investable.”

And creatives — once obsessed with craft — are now caught in loops of engagement farming. It’s not “What did you make?” anymore. It’s “How many noticed before it was over?”

Speculation rewards velocity, not vision.

It turns creativity into a casino, where we keep betting on our own relevance. Even the language of art has shifted — “drops,” “floor price,” “community alpha.” We stopped talking about what something means and started asking what it’s worth.

This economy of anticipation keeps us in a constant state of almost. We’re always on the verge of the next thing — but nothing lands, nothing lingers. Attention, like capital, has become liquidity.

To create meaning again, design has to resist this speculative loop. It has to slow down, to reclaim patience as a form of rebellion. The future shouldn’t just be bought early — it should be built deliberately. Because right now, speculation is our culture’s addiction.

And the house always wins.


Speculation as Culture was originally published in Coinmonks on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.
Share Insights

You May Also Like

Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny

Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny

The post Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The cryptocurrency world is buzzing with a recent controversy surrounding a bold OpenVPP partnership claim. This week, OpenVPP (OVPP) announced what it presented as a significant collaboration with the U.S. government in the innovative field of energy tokenization. However, this claim quickly drew the sharp eye of on-chain analyst ZachXBT, who highlighted a swift and official rebuttal that has sent ripples through the digital asset community. What Sparked the OpenVPP Partnership Claim Controversy? The core of the issue revolves around OpenVPP’s assertion of a U.S. government partnership. This kind of collaboration would typically be a monumental endorsement for any private cryptocurrency project, especially given the current regulatory climate. Such a partnership could signify a new era of mainstream adoption and legitimacy for energy tokenization initiatives. OpenVPP initially claimed cooperation with the U.S. government. This alleged partnership was said to be in the domain of energy tokenization. The announcement generated considerable interest and discussion online. ZachXBT, known for his diligent on-chain investigations, was quick to flag the development. He brought attention to the fact that U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Commissioner Hester Peirce had directly addressed the OpenVPP partnership claim. Her response, delivered within hours, was unequivocal and starkly contradicted OpenVPP’s narrative. How Did Regulatory Authorities Respond to the OpenVPP Partnership Claim? Commissioner Hester Peirce’s statement was a crucial turning point in this unfolding story. She clearly stated that the SEC, as an agency, does not engage in partnerships with private cryptocurrency projects. This response effectively dismantled the credibility of OpenVPP’s initial announcement regarding their supposed government collaboration. Peirce’s swift clarification underscores a fundamental principle of regulatory bodies: maintaining impartiality and avoiding endorsements of private entities. Her statement serves as a vital reminder to the crypto community about the official stance of government agencies concerning private ventures. Moreover, ZachXBT’s analysis…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 02:13
Fed rate decision September 2025

Fed rate decision September 2025

The post Fed rate decision September 2025 appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. WASHINGTON – The Federal Reserve on Wednesday approved a widely anticipated rate cut and signaled that two more are on the way before the end of the year as concerns intensified over the U.S. labor market. In an 11-to-1 vote signaling less dissent than Wall Street had anticipated, the Federal Open Market Committee lowered its benchmark overnight lending rate by a quarter percentage point. The decision puts the overnight funds rate in a range between 4.00%-4.25%. Newly-installed Governor Stephen Miran was the only policymaker voting against the quarter-point move, instead advocating for a half-point cut. Governors Michelle Bowman and Christopher Waller, looked at for possible additional dissents, both voted for the 25-basis point reduction. All were appointed by President Donald Trump, who has badgered the Fed all summer to cut not merely in its traditional quarter-point moves but to lower the fed funds rate quickly and aggressively. In the post-meeting statement, the committee again characterized economic activity as having “moderated” but added language saying that “job gains have slowed” and noted that inflation “has moved up and remains somewhat elevated.” Lower job growth and higher inflation are in conflict with the Fed’s twin goals of stable prices and full employment.  “Uncertainty about the economic outlook remains elevated” the Fed statement said. “The Committee is attentive to the risks to both sides of its dual mandate and judges that downside risks to employment have risen.” Markets showed mixed reaction to the developments, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average up more than 300 points but the S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite posting losses. Treasury yields were modestly lower. At his post-meeting news conference, Fed Chair Jerome Powell echoed the concerns about the labor market. “The marked slowing in both the supply of and demand for workers is unusual in this less dynamic…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 02:44