Chris’s response is exactly the kind of pure market logic that got us into this mess in the first place. Let me offer a product manager’s perspective on why “the market has spoken” isn’t the end of the discussion.
User Research 101: Build for Your Users’ Needs
As a PM, I start with a fundamental question: Who are we building for?
For ten years, the crypto industry said: “We’re building for people who are underserved by traditional finance. The unbanked. The financially excluded. Regular people who want control over their money.”
Now we’re saying: “Actually, we’re building for Fortune 500 AI agents because they have clearer ROI and bigger budgets.”
That’s not product-market fit. That’s a complete pivot away from our stated user base because serving our original users was hard and unprofitable.
The Uncomfortable Questions About Impact
Let me ask some questions that Chris’s market analysis conveniently ignores:
-
If crypto becomes B2B infrastructure for corporate AI agents, what happened to financial inclusion?
-
Are we measuring success by market cap or by positive social impact?
-
Did we build a financial system that serves Goldman Sachs’ trading bots instead of a single mother in Kenya?
Chris can mock “banking the unbanked” as marketing, but that was supposed to be the actual mission. Not a tagline. The foundational purpose.
The Sustainability Angle Nobody’s Discussing
Here’s what bothers me from an environmental product perspective: Agentic commerce at scale could have massive sustainability implications.
If we’re heading toward -5 trillion in machine-to-machine transactions:
- What’s the energy cost of processing millions of autonomous agent payments?
- Are we optimizing for transaction efficiency or carbon efficiency?
- Who bears the environmental cost of high-frequency agent trading?
Before we celebrate agent infrastructure as “winning,” maybe we should ask: Winning for whom? And at what cost?
The Historical Parallel Everyone Keeps Getting Wrong
Multiple people have compared this to internet evolution: “It was B2B first, then consumer!”
But there’s a crucial difference:
Internet progression:
- Military/academic infrastructure (ARPANET)
- Corporate adoption (email, websites)
- Consumer revolution (broadband, smartphones)
- Democratization (everyone online)
Current crypto trajectory:
- Speculative trading (retail, 2017-2021)
- Enterprise agent infrastructure (Fortune 500, 2024-2026)
- ??? (Are we democratizing or consolidating?)
The internet became more accessible over time. Are we sure crypto is following the same path? Or are we building a financial system that’s optimized for machines and incidentally usable by humans?
What Product-Market Fit Actually Means
Chris talks about market signals and capital allocation. Fine. But product-market fit isn’t just “someone will pay for this.”
Real PMF requires:
- Clear user pain point (✓ agents need payments)
- Effective solution (✓ crypto wallets work for agents)
- Sustainable value creation (? TBD)
- Positive externalities (? Very uncertain)
We have 2 out of 4. That’s not “mission accomplished.”
The Pragmatic Middle Path
I’m not saying Steve should ignore enterprise revenue. I’m saying there’s a middle path between pure idealism and pure mercenary capitalism.
Here’s what I think responsible product development looks like:
Phase 1: Build agent infrastructure (pragmatic revenue)
- Serve enterprise customers who are paying now
- Prove the technology at scale
- Generate sustainable revenue
Phase 2: Intentional accessibility design (mission alignment)
- Use enterprise profits to fund consumer-facing products
- Build personal AI agent tools for regular people, not just Fortune 500
- Ensure human oversight and control mechanisms
Phase 3: Measure both commercial AND social impact
- Track revenue metrics (for sustainability)
- Track accessibility metrics (for mission)
- Track environmental impact (for planet)
This isn’t “nice to have.” This is building technology responsibly.
Response to Steve’s Question
You asked: “Should I pivot to agent infrastructure?”
My answer: Yes, but with intentionality about who benefits.
Build the enterprise infrastructure because that’s where validation and revenue exist. But design it with an eye toward eventual accessibility. Ask yourself:
- Could this infrastructure eventually serve personal AI agents for regular people?
- Are we building in ways that concentrate power or distribute it?
- What would it take to make this technology accessible to small businesses, not just Fortune 500?
Don’t just chase the market. Build infrastructure that serves the market you want to create.
The Question Chris Won’t Answer
Chris says markets are “amoral optimization systems” and we should just follow the money.
But here’s what that misses: We’re not just responding to markets. We’re creating them.
Every technical decision shapes what’s possible. Every pricing model determines who can access the system. Every protocol design encodes values about who matters.
If we build exclusively for enterprise agents because “that’s where the money is,” we’re not discovering product-market fit. We’re choosing to build for corporate customers over individual users.
That’s a values decision masquerading as market inevitability.
What Gives Me Hope
Despite my concerns, here’s what I’m optimistic about:
The same infrastructure that enables Fortune 500 agents could enable:
- Personal finance AI agents for regular people
- Small business automation for entrepreneurs
- Cooperative agent networks for communities
But that only happens if we design for it from the start. If we build exclusively for enterprise use cases, we’ll optimize for corporate needs and lock out other users.
The technology is general-purpose. How we deploy it is a choice.
My Commitment
I got into Web3 because I believed technology could amplify positive social impact. I still believe that.
So yes, I’m building for enterprise customers who pay the bills. But I’m also:
- Ensuring our protocols are open and forkable
- Building admin tools that regular people can understand
- Measuring impact beyond just revenue metrics
- Advocating for accessibility in every design review
Maybe that makes me a bad capitalist. But I’d rather be a good steward of technology that affects millions of people’s financial lives.
To Steve: The Hard Question
You’re a founder, so you have to make a practical decision with limited runway. I get it.
But before you pivot fully to agent infrastructure, ask yourself:
Five years from now, do you want to have built something that made Fortune 500 companies more efficient, or something that empowered regular people?
Both are valid. Both can be profitable. But they’re different visions of the future.
Choose the one you can defend when your daughter asks what you built.
Chris, I know you’ll say I’m being idealistic. But someone needs to ask these questions before we wake up in 2030 with trillion in agent commerce and realize we built a financial system that serves robots better than humans.