An industry that can only exist in secrecy forever has no future.

Written by: Liu Honglin

Some industries are immediately recognized by parents, such as civil servants, doctors, and teachers; some industries make young people envious when mentioned, like product managers, investment banking analysts, and programmers at major internet companies. But if you say at the dinner table, "I'm working in Web3," you're likely to get one of three reactions: friends laughing at you for "trading coins," peers asking you, "Have you issued a token?" and elders shaking their heads in confusion.

So you choose not to say anything, or you speak vaguely: "I'm researching new technologies," "working on some overseas projects," or "helping a friend with data asset matters." This inability to clearly define your "industry positioning" creates a sense of "shame" for Web3 practitioners, which we refer to as the "sense of secrecy."

"Unspoken" professional labels: The self-identity crisis of practitioners

In the Web3 industry, you'll find an interesting phenomenon: many people's professional introductions are quite convoluted. Someone who is clearly the legal director of an exchange might say they are doing cross-border compliance research; a core founder of an NFT project might claim they are working on cultural digital products; and even a friend who has made a good amount of money through DeFi arbitrage might say they are "doing some overseas asset allocation."

It's not that they lack confidence; it's that the labels associated with the entire industry are easily misunderstood, belittled, and stigmatized. From "coin traders" to "pyramid schemes" to "harvesting retail investors," and even "money laundering" or "scamming," none of these terms are suitable for a resume.

If you say Web3 is the forefront of financial technology, a prototype of the decentralized future internet, or an experimental field for blockchain technology applications, no matter how passionately you explain, the other person will only ask, "So what coin are you actually trading?"

To be frank, this "sense of secrecy" does not arise from nowhere. It is intertwined with several very real issues.

First, there is policy ambiguity. Many countries are still in the exploratory stage of regulating virtual assets, especially in mainland China, where issuing tokens, supporting trading, and encouraging speculation are not allowed. In this context, practitioners often face a psychological burden of operating in a gray area. You know that what you're doing is technological innovation and compliance exploration, but you also understand that even if you're just writing code or doing operations for an overseas project, others will think you're "engaging in illegal trading."

Second, there are too many chaotic phenomena in the industry. Scams, Ponzi schemes, harvesting retail investors, and running away… In the past few years, projects in the Web3 industry have faced one crisis after another, and the news that breaks through is often not about technological breakthroughs but rather about a project team absconding with funds or an exchange collapsing. The "crypto circle" has become a hotspot for negative public sentiment. As a serious participant in the industry, you will also be automatically labeled with these tags.

Additionally, public perception lags behind. When you tell your peers that you're working on blockchain technology, they still think of Bitcoin; when you mention DAOs, they assume you're "organizing something"; when you say you're issuing NFTs, they think you're selling avatars. The more you explain, the more confused they become. In the end, you can only choose silence or gloss over it with "doing some internet finance."

"Being open and aboveboard" seems to have become a luxury

In this industry atmosphere, many Web3 practitioners actually feel psychological pressure. They have to consider various "risk controls" while working: don't talk about tokens in public, don't leave personal real-name information, don't use domestic bank cards for payments, and don't tell relatives that your project has issued a token.

This is completely different from traditional entrepreneurship. In the Web2 era, if you created an app, launched a new consumer brand, or opened an e-commerce store, you would still dare to post about it on social media even if you lost money. But in Web3, even if your project raises millions and has thousands of users, you are reluctant to flaunt it because, on one hand, you fear being targeted, and on the other, you fear being misunderstood.

Ultimately, this state of "doing things in secret" is a compensatory behavior for our lack of social legitimacy in this industry. Moreover, everyone understands that the industry is not yet in a state that allows you to "hold your head high." You can present a PPT filled with "Token Economics" and "ecological incentive models," but in the end, others will still ask, "Is this just a way to harvest retail investors?"

Should we be a bit braver?

To be honest, Web3 practitioners feel conflicted. On one hand, you believe you are building the infrastructure of the future internet, representing technology, innovation, freedom, and globalization; on the other hand, you selectively avoid these terms in real life, fearing that others will know you are involved in blockchain, tokens, or Web3.

It's not that you don't believe in this path; it's that you don't quite believe the world can understand what you're saying.

But this doesn't mean we can only continue to "do things in secret." On the contrary, more and more Web3 practitioners are actively trying to establish new ways of dialogue—not by using jargon, but by telling stories; not by insisting on "technological advancement," but by speaking through real-world applications; not by emphasizing "the ideals of decentralization," but by showing those around them the real value of use.

For example, when someone used to say, "I work on wallets," people would ask, "Are you laundering money?" Now, some have changed their phrasing to, "We are creating cross-border remittance tools specifically for overseas workers." Doesn't that sound much better? Similarly, when someone said, "We do NFTs," others would respond, "Oh, you're just selling avatars again." If you say, "We help musicians distribute digital royalties so they can receive payments directly without going through platforms," suddenly your identity is established.

Of course, it's not just about rebranding to solve the "sense of secrecy," but at least it's a shift—from avoidance to explanation, from internal conflict to construction, from self-denial to gradually gaining identity recognition.

More importantly, we must acknowledge the existence of gray areas in our industry and recognize our position within them. But gray is not a sin; secrecy is. You can operate in gray areas, but you shouldn't always face the world with a "doing things in secret" attitude.

Where this industry ultimately heads is uncertain. But one thing is clear: an industry that can only exist in secrecy forever has no future.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。