Much like in traditional finance, the sheer size and scope of decentralised finance and cryptocurrency lead to the convergence of many different ideals, ideologies, and use cases, with the results often being interesting, to say the least.
On one end of the scale, there is a growing number of pragmatists and utility-focused users of cryptocurrency.
Firm adherents of Stafford Beer’s POSIWID maxim (the purpose of a system is what it does), pragmatic crypto users are focused on what crypto can do for them in the here and now. They use wallets, exchanges, and crypto payment cards to invest in crypto either for speculation or for specific purchases.
If there are future uses for Bitcoin, Ether, and other tokens of both the fungible and non-fungible variety, that is a bonus. However, many investors focus on whether what is available in the here and now is worth investing in, and decentralised finance’s success is judged on how it works in the present.
The opposite end of the spectrum is far more idealistic and visionary and sees crypto not as an investment instrument, nor an object of exchange but as part of a future built using Web3, based around the blockchain and involving an integration between the digital and physical worlds.
The results on this end have been somewhat mixed, to say the least. The issue with idealistic futurism is that at some point it is going to end up coming into contact with reality.
Perhaps the most infamous example of this was an attempt to create an island paradise to provide the “ultimate crypto lifestyle” that drew comparisons to a very similar island music festival.
Back To The Island
In late 2021, a presentation video for Cryptoland was published on YouTube showing a potential island for cryptocurrency enthusiasts, which appeared to be part theme park, part “working hub” and part housing facilities for owners of certain NFTs.
For an estimated 320 ETH (at the time worth over £1m), someone could buy a King Cryptolander token and be entitled to a one-acre parcel of land on the Blockchain Hills.
The video caused a lot of confusion, and not just because it had the same animation quality as the music video for Vengaboys’ 1999 single We’re Going to Ibiza.
The surreal framing of the presentation as an idealised animated tour through an island guided by a sarcastic cartoon coin led people to believe it was either a satire, a film or a metaverse project such as Decentraland that was entirely digital.
It was none of those, and most of the public reception to the project outside of the Cryptoland community itself was bewilderment at the realisation that this project was intended to be completely real.
Started by Max Olivier and Helena Lopez, the plan appeared to be to purchase the Fijian island of Nananu-i-cake, for sale both then and now for $12m.
This would be funded through the purchase and percentage of future sales of Cryptolander NFTs. There were three collections; 10,000 standard Cryptolander tokens that gave holders access to the private Vladimir Club, a Cryptolander+ token and 60 King Cryptolander tokens that were tied to specific plots of land.
However, exposure to the idea and the realisation that it was not a joke or a virtual world led to a lot of very concerning questions given that millions of pounds were on the line.
The first was size; Nananu-i-cake is less than a square mile (roughly 600 acres), which is half the size of Walt Disney World Resort. This is fairly small for all of the features that were promised.
It was also still for sale despite announcements that a purchase agreement had been made.
Another concern was that in order to purchase a King Cryptolander token you had to tick a box confirming that you were not a United States citizen, suggesting that there were potential issues with regards to property law.
The “Why Paper” also raised concerns regarding the infrastructure. If every NFT was sold at their average price, it would raise a total of $65m, which would not leave a lot of money after the island had been bought for sanitation, power generation, hygiene, transportation and essential infrastructure.
An infrastructure document claims that a lot of essential facilities will be based on the mainland of Fiji, which also did not fill people with confidence.
Ultimately, the conclusion many investors and onlookers drew was that it was either an extremely elaborate scam or an earnest scheme to build an island with an unauthorised tribute to Carlos Matos and the infamous Ponzi scheme Bitconnect for which failure was by far the best possible outcome.
Comparisons were made immediately to Fyre Festival and had it somehow been created, it is possible it could have led to a similarly dire humanitarian crisis.