Written by: Bankless
Compiled by: Plain Language Blockchain
More than a decade after the birth of cryptocurrency, we stand at a delicate crossroads: on the one hand, there is the full involvement of Wall Street capital and the rapid evolution of the underlying technology; on the other hand, the original ideal of Cypherpunk is struggling under the pressure of complex user experience and regulatory constraints.
In this interview, Zuko, founder of Zcash and a pioneer in the field of crypto privacy, shares his profound insights into the current state of the industry. He not only reflects on whether the crypto movement is repeating the mistakes of Linux, but also delves into how privacy has evolved from a "technical function" to a "survival option" in an era of rampant AI computing power.
By dissecting the user experience logic of Moxie and analyzing the Zcash governance experiment, Zuko paints a picture of a future that transcends mere financial speculation and returns to digital sovereignty. This is not only a dialogue about technology, but also a metaphysical exploration of how human civilization can maintain free will under high-pressure surveillance.
I. Reflections on the Current State of the Crypto Movement: Are We Repeating the Mistakes of Linux?
Host: Zuko, welcome back to Bankless. You've been deeply involved in the crypto industry for over a decade, and building Zcash has been a part of your life for 13 years. Looking back from 2026, do you think our crypto movement has achieved its initial goals? Have we succeeded?
Zuko: To be honest, this is a leading question, and you probably didn't expect a positive answer from me. Hearing you ask that actually makes me feel a little frustrated and negative. It reminds me of the history of Linux. Back then, Linux was a great movement aimed at empowering ordinary people and lowering the technical barrier. But looking at the current situation, it has largely become some kind of low-level software that Google uses to run its servers.
Host: It sounds like the idealism of the Linux movement has faded.
Zuko: Because it hasn't truly helped ordinary users, nor has it scaled up to the point of empowering the masses. While software engineers remain enthusiastic about using it, for non-technical users, Linux today hasn't substantially improved their digital lives. If we let this trend continue, cryptocurrency might be the same in 15 years: only a few giant financial institutions will be using blockchain to optimize costs, while 99.9% of ordinary people won't gain any real power or benefit from the technology. That would be a terrible outcome.
Host: So what do you think is the real progress we've made in the past decade?
Zuko: I'm a tech enthusiast. What I'm most gratified about is that cryptocurrency has funded a huge amount of cutting-edge cryptographic technology. For example, Zcash pioneered zero-knowledge proofs (ZKP), which were later pushed further into more advanced areas by the Ethereum ecosystem. Without the funding and organizational structure provided by cryptocurrency, DARPA, universities, or giant corporations simply wouldn't have developed these achievements in the past decade.
Host: So in your opinion, the greatest victory is the progress in cryptography, not the current market size?
Zuko: Yes. But it's actually a "soft compliment." It's like we improved the Linux kernel, but didn't actually make the world a better place.
Host: Some might argue that price charts and Wall Street's entry equate to victory. For example, Bitcoin becoming non-governmental digital gold, or Larry Fink's push for ETFs and RWA (Real-World Asset Tokenization).
Zuko: I see these as a means to improve Wall Street. If it can improve the lives of ordinary people in some way that I care about, that would be great, but there are no clear signs of that yet.
II. Bottlenecks in User Experience (UX): Why is Moxie's criticism still so deafening?
Host: What important aspects of the crypto space do you think we've overlooked?
Zuko: Absolutely the user experience part of Cypherpunk's vision. I often cite Moxie Marlinspike's (founder of Signal) perspective. He pointed out that Cypherpunk's dream stalled because the group's logic was fatally flawed. Their approach was: first, create tools that work well for themselves; second, teach everyone else in the world to become like them.
Host: This kind of "elitism" approach is indeed difficult to reach the general public.
Zuko: Moxie said this will never work. You have to provide people with tools that fit their current situation, without forcing them to change. If you don't reach at least 100 million users, you're wasting your time because you're not impacting the world at all. The current crypto industry is repeating this mistake: we create complex systems that protect freedom, privacy, and autonomy, and then expect ordinary people to learn how to use them.
Host: So cognitive load has become the biggest obstacle.
Zuko: Exactly. A good user experience is one where the cognitive load is close to zero. I remember Brian Armstrong telling me about his regulatory strategy: at least 100 million users. That's exactly the same logic as Moxie.
Host: From a long-term perspective, Ethereum is attempting to expand beyond decentralized finance into areas such as decentralized identity, computing, and AI. How far do you think this Cypherpunk vision can go?
Zuko: I hope it goes all the way because it concerns whether our future generations can grow up in a more stable and civilized society. Signal's success inspired me. Signal's philosophy is that the user interface (UX) should reflect the reality of the underlying system. If you're chatting on an unencrypted software, an honest UI should display the avatars of you, your friends, the company CEO, and the system administrator in the chat box.
Host: That sounds very intuitive and horrifying.
Zuko: If the CIA is eavesdropping, their faces should appear. Signal simply corrects this "honesty." Current social platforms like Twitter or Telegram are essentially "honeypots." If you're chatting with five friends in a Telegram group, Pavel Durov's face should actually appear in the chat because it's not end-to-end encrypted by default. People need privacy, and it's technically possible; the key is whether we can provide an interactive experience comparable to Silicon Valley giants.
III. The Privacy Paradox of the AI Era: When Algorithms Can Understand Your Financial Intentions
Host: Are you optimistic about the future? Especially now that AI is changing everything.
Zuko: I'm optimistic. While AI may simplify Linux installation and configuration and make UX less of a challenge, it also brings new risks.
Host: You mean AI's manipulation of information?
Zuko: A few days ago, there was a case where a user asked ChatGPT to correct a tutorial. The tutorial concerned how to use disposable phone number services to protect personal information. In addition to correcting the error, ChatGPT also proactively deleted all content related to disposable phone numbers and cryptocurrency, arguing that these tools "could be used for abuse and fraud."
Host: This is indeed very dystopian.
Zuko: This is the nightmare scenario where AI doesn't provide what you want. Most current AI follows a Web2 business model: relying on advertising and user lock-in. When AI deeply integrates your emails, calendar, and financial data, it can not only predict your behavior but also guide your intentions.
Host: So what different solutions can cryptocurrencies offer?
Zuko: Cryptocurrency offers a completely new funding model, and although it's still in the experimental stage, it's trying to break free from the exploitative logic of Web2. We need to establish a positive cycle of "paid use + open competition + no capture".
Host: Zcash's recent price performance has been very impressive. Does this also reflect a shift in market sentiment?
Zuko: Yes. Such large-scale price signals are very difficult to forge, which proves that people do care about privacy. As AI tools can easily link on-chain addresses, the once transparent ledger becomes extremely dangerous, and people are beginning to realize that privacy is not an "optional feature," but a survival necessity.
IV. The Metaphysics of Value Storage: The Mystery of Privacy Options and "Residual Value"
Host: There are many misconceptions about privacy protection. They often understand privacy as "cutting off the connection during the transfer process," similar to the concept of a mixer.
Zuko: That's exactly what I wanted to correct. Many people try to move from Ethereum to a new address, thinking that it's safe after some operations. But in the age of AI, this "value in flight" is almost impossible to truly protect privacy from. AI can easily see through your disguise by linking your intentions and signals at both ends.
Host: So what should the correct logic be?
Zuko: You can only gain privacy from "value at rest." I have a somewhat metaphysical point: if you hold ETH and plan to transfer it, your intention is clear, and AI can understand it. But if you choose to exchange some of your assets for ZEC to hold long-term, and don't have a clear plan for the next step, the AI will be blinded.
Host: Because the act of holding itself disrupts the continuity of intent.
Zuko: Exactly. That's what "privacy options" are. You don't need to hold them forever, but you need to hold them only if you don't intend to use them in the future. Just like your checking account, you don't always spend it all; you keep a certain balance. From an adversarial information theory perspective, keeping 1-2 months' worth of living expenses in a privacy pool is reasonable.
Host: The example you mentioned earlier, the integration of Zashi Wallet and Near Intents, seems to demonstrate the practicality of this kind of "static privacy".
Zuko: That example really resonated with me. When I needed to anonymously pay for Proton Mail, I didn't need to ask them to accept Zcash. I simply scanned the code in my Zashi wallet and completed the payment via Near Intents. To the outside world, it was just a regular transfer, while my asset origin and personal information remained in a privacy pool. That's the power of prioritizing UX.
V. Zcash's Governance Experiment: Development Fund, Cross-link, and the "Crypto Bitcoin" Debate
Host: Let's talk about Zcash governance. Zcash has a well-known "Dev Fund" mechanism, which is considered sacrilegious in the Bitcoin community.
Zuko: Zcash mimics Bitcoin's 21 million total supply and halving mechanism, but the difference is that we allocate 20% of new coin production to a development fund. As the price of ZEC rises, the size of this fund increases significantly, providing ample fuel for the protocol's continued development and preventing many projects from falling into a "death spiral" during bear markets.
Host: But this mechanism has also sparked a lot of controversy, especially regarding the distribution of power.
Zuko: Indeed. Zcash's social contract undergoes a major discussion every four years. We've evolved from funding the founding team to funding non-profit organizations, and now to a system controlled by committees and token voting. As an experiment, I'm excited to see it trying different models.
Host: There's been a lot of discussion lately about the meme "Encrypted Bitcoin." What are your thoughts on this hashtag?
Zuko: I really like this meme. The fewer the words, the stronger the power.
Host: But some people are worried that the Cross-link mechanism you are promoting (adding staking on top of mining) will undermine Bitcoin's pure PoW image.
Zuko: I'm trying a "Jiu-Jitsu" style response. Cross-link isn't about becoming a PoS, but about strengthening the sustainability and credibility of the 21 million block cap. Whether Bitcoin's 21 million block cap can be maintained in the long run is actually opaque, because when the block reward approaches zero, it's still unknown whether transaction fees alone can support the security network.
Host: Zcash is attempting to address both privacy and long-term security at the protocol level.
Zuko: Yes. Due to its underlying design, Ethereum makes it difficult to add a privacy layer without leaking information; it's like taping up a leaky boat. Zcash was created to make privacy a native feature of the blockchain.
Host: Zuko, thank you for sharing today. Your commitment to Cypherpunk values is admirable.
Zuko: Thank you. Finally, I want to say to the audience: Go and exchange the equivalent of your checking account balance for ZEC and deposit it into your privacy wallet. You are not only protecting yourself, but also contributing to building a better future. Let's all "Zodling" (Zcash community slang for holding tokens).
Host: Go to Zodle, folks. Of course, this is not financial advice; the crypto market is extremely risky, please proceed with caution.
Through an in-depth conversation with Zuko, it becomes clear that the true value of cryptocurrency lies not in how much it can save Wall Street in settlement costs, but in its ability to build an unbreakable firewall for individuals in the digital age. With AI algorithms becoming increasingly sophisticated, capable of easily "reading minds" and linking transaction intentions, privacy is no longer the obsession of a few geeks, but a fundamental tool for protecting individual choices.
Zcash's "static value privacy" logic challenges the outdated notion that privacy is merely an intermediary in the money transfer process, elevating it to a "privacy option." While numerous challenges remain in user experience and governance, as Zuko emphasizes, Cypherpunk's vision will only truly be realized when the cognitive load of privacy tools is reduced to zero and they can serve hundreds of millions of ordinary users.
In this new frontier built of code, "Zodling" is not only a way to store wealth, but also a silent vote on digital sovereignty.
