Interview with Arthur Hayes & NEAR Co-Founder: HYPE Target Price $150—Does NEAR Still Have 20x Upside?
TechFlow Selected TechFlow Selected
Interview with Arthur Hayes & NEAR Co-Founder: HYPE Target Price $150—Does NEAR Still Have 20x Upside?
Privacy is a prerequisite for cryptocurrency adoption.
Navigating Web3 tides with focused insightsCompiled & Translated by TechFlow
Guests: Arthur Hayes, CIO of Maelstrom; Illia Polosukhin, Co-Founder of NEAR
Hosts: Andy; Rob
Podcast Source: The Rollup
Original Title: Arthur Hayes & Illia Polosukhin: Privacy Is The Last 1000x (NEAR & ZEC)
Air Date: May 25, 2026
Key Takeaways
This episode of The Rollup features Arthur Hayes and Illia Polosukhin discussing macro liquidity, privacy assets, NEAR Intents, AI and onchain execution layers, and the investment theses behind HYPE, NEAR, and ZEC. Arthur argues that war, the AI arms race, and supply-chain restructuring are driving the U.S., China, and Europe to sustain their economies via debt and monetary expansion—ultimately spilling liquidity into Bitcoin and a select few crypto assets with strong narratives and real revenue. Illia emphasizes that for blockchains to enter daily payments, payroll, invoicing, and AI-agent economies, privacy is not optional—it’s a prerequisite for mass adoption. Both agree that the crypto market is shifting from indiscriminate speculation toward fundamental analysis, where privacy, sovereignty, real revenue, and token value capture will define the next phase.
Highlights of Key Insights
Macro Liquidity and the AI Arms Race
- "AI has already become part of national defense. Drones, AI-driven intelligence, and battlefield decision-making are all being integrated into warfare—and governments will print money to win wars."
- "Countries historically built food and energy security on numerous assumptions—yet when critical chokepoints like the Strait of Hormuz become unstable, holding U.S. Treasuries won’t feed your population."
- "These savings held in U.S. Treasuries must ultimately be sold to purchase real goods, build redundant supply chains, and secure alternative energy routes."
- "Bitcoin’s advantage lies in its mathematical inevitability: if tomorrow’s fiat units increase relative to today’s, its price rises purely by math—while everything else depends heavily on narrative."
L1 Consolidation and the Return to Fundamentals
- "Blockspace has become a highly commoditized good—with supply vastly exceeding demand. The only remaining issue was its extreme non-fungibility. NEAR’s bet on chain abstraction and intents is precisely about making it fungible: every chain, every asset, every user can interoperate seamlessly—without needing to think about which blockspace they’re using."
- "That old logic—buying an asset because a wave of retail will follow—is fading. Retail risk appetite has dropped sharply. People now worry whether they’ll afford oil and food next year—not whether to speculate on some asset."
- "Markets are now focusing on which assets generate real revenue, ship real products, and attract real users."
- "For an L1, full dilution matters immensely. Many projects face massive institutional unlock pressure overhead—whereas NEAR already enjoys relatively clean upside space."
Zcash and the Undervaluation of Privacy Assets
- "There’s nothing more normal than owning private money online. Zcash and Monero embody precisely this demand."
- "As Big Tech, governments, and AI gain ever-greater power to track every aspect of our lives, cryptographically proven financial privacy becomes critically important."
- "If you hold Zcash but don’t hold it in shielded form—why hold it at all?"
- "Zcash and NEAR form the core of my privacy investment thesis: in a world cohabited by AI, Big Tech, and Big Government, privacy will be revalued by markets—and Maelstrom stands to profit."
- "I believe NEAR has ~20x potential over the next year, while Zcash may reach ~5x."
NEAR Intents, Private Transactions, and Mass Adoption
- "If we want blockchains to truly enter everyday life, privacy isn’t optional—it’s the prerequisite for crypto’s mass adoption."
- "If I pay at a café, I don’t want the shop owner knowing how much money I have—or the entire world knowing I just spent there."
- "Privacy intents aim not merely to enable ownership of private assets—but to let transfers, trades, payments, yields, and more happen confidentially across *all* assets."
- "Payroll, invoicing, and many other use cases once considered ideal for crypto simply cannot function meaningfully on fully transparent chains."
AI Agents and Onchain Execution Layers
- "In the future, we’ll interact with computation through AI—and blockchains will become the universal execution layer."
- "AI also needs privacy. You don’t want labs harvesting your data to train better models—then selling those services back to you via subscription fees."
- "AI is the new computing interface; intents are the underlying business layer."
- "Our core thesis since 2017 has been that AI will become how we build software and interact with computation."
Hyperliquid and the Dream of Decentralized Finance
- "What’s one killer app in crypto? Exchanges. Who are the richest people in crypto? Exchange founders."
- "Hyperliquid’s most important innovation isn’t perpetuals or decentralization per se—it’s getting the tokenomics right."
- "No VC sales—only team allocations—and nearly all revenue flows directly back to token holders. That’s exceptionally rare at this scale."
AI Labor Displacement and Political Risk
- "The impact of AI on labor depends heavily on where you live. Coastal, high-income, white-collar professionals in the U.S. will be protected—while overseas back-office workers will be instantly unemployed, with little public concern."
- "I believe displacement has already begun—it’s just unevenly distributed. The only opportunity is staying at the forefront. As we’ve always said: leverage these technologies to upgrade your capabilities—learn faster, apply faster."
- "What could truly stop the music isn’t necessarily a mega-IPO—but politics. People will ask: 'AI firms grew fabulously wealthy using humanity’s collective knowledge and interactions—what did we get in return?'"
- "If AI profits face large-scale progressive taxation, it’s not that companies won’t earn money—it’s whether you’d still pay 100x revenue for a company potentially taxed at 50% on AI income. Of course not."
Arthur’s Macro Investment Thesis
Host Rob: Arthur, you were previously quite cautious—warning everyone about risks—then shifted to full bullishness. What changed? What triggered that shift?
Arthur Hayes:
At the start of the year, I wrote an article arguing that Bitcoin was front-running a credit event driven by AI-induced deflation. My view was that monetary authorities wouldn’t print enough until they saw a financial crisis looming. At that time, my entire argument hinged on the observation that after Bitcoin hit its all-time high, the Nasdaq had largely flatlined—yet Bitcoin fell alongside the U.S. investment-grade bond ETF IGB, dropping from $126,000 to just over $60,000. I viewed that as a clear credit event.
Then, on February 28, the U.S. fired on Iran—igniting the war situation and signaling to markets that this would be a liquidity-positive event. First, AI is already part of national defense. Drones, AI-powered drones, and AI intelligence systems are already participating in combat operations across all belligerents. Governments will print money to win wars—and since AI is integral to war, both the U.S. and Chinese governments will underwrite AI capital expenditures.
We’re already seeing bank loans and equity investments flow to chipmakers. At least in the U.S., companies like Intel are receiving support—and quantum computing initiatives are similarly announced, such as the $1 billion allocated to IBM-related projects. These are all facets of the same theme.
Meanwhile, many countries built food and energy assumptions on access through contested waters like the Strait of Hormuz. Now that’s becoming untenable—so they begin asking: Why hold U.S. Treasuries? If I need to feed my population—or if I’m stranded on an island without jet fuel—U.S. Treasuries won’t help, especially if my ships can’t pass through the strait.
So they need to build redundancy in all critical supplies—especially food and energy; invest in new trade relationships; and construct new pipelines to route oil around the Persian Gulf, e.g., out of the UAE. All of this means savings held in U.S. Treasuries must be sold and converted into real goods.
The U.S. won’t allow such sell-offs to crash markets. It will print money to fill that gap—ensuring stability. So I see February 28 as the catalyst. The U.S., China, and Europe will all print money to fund wartime economies and AI capital spending—and that liquidity will ultimately flow into Bitcoin, explaining its strong performance.
Heavy Bets on NEAR, ZEC, and HYPE
Arthur Hayes:
We’re now seeing a small set of tokens rise—including several I hold: NEAR, HYPE, and Zcash—all performing extremely well since February 28. That’s my broad logic.
I didn’t trade much in Q1. After the war started, I added positions—but essentially, we acquired these assets at excellent prices long ago. Markets are now validating why we bought them 6–12 months ago.
Host Andy: Crypto Twitter is buzzing about whether this trade has become consensus—while we’ve been heavily invested for a while. We’ve followed the macro closely—and watched your CoinDesk shows and articles. Initially, markets wavered—then suddenly NEAR, HYPE, and ZEC surged. Everything is now converging.
L1 Consolidation Has Already Begun
Host Andy: Illia, I’d love your take on market consolidation. This isn’t your first so-called bear market—we’ve seen similar phases before—but this one feels uniquely real, because the market itself is evolving.
Institutional allocators have entered, the macro environment is highly unstable—and people now view the industry through an “adapt to the institutional era or get left behind” lens. Beyond that, the industry overall is maturing and growing more complex: you need products, revenue, real users, and genuinely sustainable, robust tokenomics.
From a founder’s perspective—what exactly happened in the market over the past 6–8 months? Why the rapid change? And how has NEAR navigated this phase?
Illia Polosukhin:
I see several converging threads—starting with the L1/L2 logic. I recall giving a talk in 2019 saying we’d first experience a massive boom, then consolidation—and finally only a handful of projects would survive. We’re approaching that stage now.
Blockspace has become a highly commoditized good—with supply far exceeding demand. The sole remaining problem was its extreme non-fungibility. NEAR’s bet on chain abstraction and intents is precisely about making it fungible: every chain, every asset, every user can interoperate seamlessly—without needing to think about which blockspace they’re using.
The second thread is the return to fundamentals. You’ve been advocating this direction for over a year—even longer. And now it’s happening. Not just the market—but serious institutional investors analyzing it—are shifting. By “institutional,” I don’t mean BlackRock or Fidelity—I mean funds and professional investors. They’re all changing.
That old logic—buying an asset because a wave of retail will follow—is fading. Retail risk appetite has dropped sharply. As Arthur just said, people now worry whether they’ll afford oil and food next year—not whether to speculate on some asset.
So markets ask: Which assets generate real revenue? Which provide products we actually use? If I stake it, do I gain new capabilities? For example, staking HYPE grants lower fees and broader market access. ZEC offers privacy—different logic, but same outcome. NEAR delivers cross-chain, intent-based, and compute-related capabilities.
All are new capabilities market participants want—making these assets focal points—not tokens whose value remains ambiguous until fee switches turn on. I believe these two threads are converging to shape today’s broader crypto environment.
Why Arthur Likes Zcash
Host Rob: The industry feels like it’s entering a reorganization phase. Even Bankless seems fractured—David Hoffman sold all his ETH, and Merch abandoned Solana entirely for Zcash. Arthur—why is Zcash and privacy so important to you? Is this crypto’s core ethos? And what role do NEAR Intents play here?
Arthur Hayes:
Zcash’s current buzz is new—but I remember its pre-mainnet launch in 2016, when it was the hottest thing in the market. I was still at BitMEX then, and we launched the first Zcash price derivative. That market went wild—peaking near $3,000 on Poloniex. If you recall that exchange, there was even a moment where 7 BTC traded for 1 ZEC.
It was pure chaos. Then block rewards flooded supply—and the price crashed. Zcash had real issues then: the trusted setup required trusting Zooko, Eli, and others not to cheat during key-generation ceremonies. There was also controversy over the team’s 20% block reward subsidy.
But those issues are gone. The protocol upgraded—removing the trusted setup—and we now know it’s cryptographically secure. The 20% subsidy is gone too. Now it has a clean slate—and sufficient supply to form a real market, rather than the volatile post-genesis phase.
Naval Changed Arthur’s Mind
Arthur Hayes:
Last year at Token 2049, I attended a dinner where Naval was present. He started talking to me about Zcash. It had risen from ~$30 to ~$120—I asked why he liked it, knowing I held substantial Monero.
He explained that Monero’s ring signatures aren’t as strong as widely believed—Japanese law enforcement had successfully de-anonymized transactions in a criminal case. I thought, “This guy clearly knows what he’s talking about”—so I went home and bought millions of dollars’ worth of Zcash.
I also noticed something else: I work with many brokers—but only two would quote Zcash prices, because many institutions say, “We don’t do privacy coins.” My reaction was, “If it’s hard to buy, I want it more.”
Then I dug deeper—verifying Naval’s claims—and kept buying, adding more positions. Zcash’s 2016 surge stemmed from widespread awareness that Bitcoin is pseudonymous—not truly private. Many people value privacy in certain contexts. Having private money online is perfectly normal—and that’s exactly what Zcash and Monero represent.
As it becomes clearer that Big Tech, Big Government, and AI can know and track everything about us, cryptographically proven financial privacy becomes essential—which is why Zcash is my #2 position. Even buying it after a 4x rebound from $30, its performance has been exceptional.
Next came UX. The best app used to go by another name—it’s now called Zashi, where users can hold shielded Zcash. One of Zcash’s biggest 2016 problems was that while it worked technically, almost no one held it in shielded form. Everyone used transparent Zcash—a poor clone of Bitcoin. If you can’t hold it privately, what’s the point?
Now things have changed. Apps like Zashi let you hold shielded Zcash on mobile with decent UX—and paired with cold wallets like Keystone, you can store shielded Zcash securely offline. I strongly recommend all Zcash holders use shielded form—or why hold it at all?
NEAR Intents and Anonymous Swaps
Arthur Hayes:
The UX is already solid—now comes the more exciting part. We invested in Zashi’s funding round. Then, within Zashi, I can anonymously send any crypto asset to anyone on the internet—using shielded Zcash and NEAR Intents. For example, I start with shielded Zcash and end up sending USDT on Tron—completely anonymously.
This is hugely significant. Look at NEAR’s price: like other crypto assets, it’s down significantly from its ATH and cycled through volatility. I thought, if privacy becomes the big narrative, Zcash is the first stop—and the second is whoever enables anonymous value transfer across any chain. That capability is equally massive.
NEAR’s economics will catch up—this is a highly asymmetric opportunity. Of course, I’m less heavily allocated to NEAR than Zcash, but I believe NEAR has ~20x potential over the next year, while Zcash may reach ~5x. Capital allocation reflects risk tolerance. That’s why these two assets form the core of my privacy investment thesis: in a world cohabited by AI, Big Tech, and Big Government, privacy will be revalued by markets—and Maelstrom stands to profit.
Privacy Is the Prerequisite for Mass Adoption
Host Rob: Illia, when viewing NEAR from Arthur’s allocator perspective, it’s clear AI is a major theme—including identity management, payment networks, and infrastructure for AI agents. Yet the true unlock for Zcash’s ecosystem value lies in Intents—making privacy coins more efficient and practical.
I have some data: NEAR Intents’ historical total volume is nearly $20B—currently ~$18.9B. NEAR Intents have generated $33M in fees from that volume—much of it from Zcash, as this is virtually the only place such operations occur. Arthur also noted that privacy intents generate positive cash flow for the protocol.
Can you explain how you plan to monetize Intents? What’s NEAR’s current cash flow status—and how do you plan to scale Intents to serve the broader NEAR ecosystem?
Illia Polosukhin:
The core point Arthur made is that we need onchain privacy. I’d go further: If we want blockchains to truly enter everyday life, privacy is non-negotiable—it’s the prerequisite for crypto’s mass adoption.
If I buy coffee at a café, I don’t want the café knowing how much money I have—or the whole world knowing I just paid there. Nor do I want someone waiting for me next time I visit. Recently, someone posted a Twitter thread about someone’s onchain credit card transaction—visible to all—which is absurd.
So, if we want crypto, stablecoins, and other assets to function as daily money in real transactions, privacy is foundational. Even for investing, I now need dozens of addresses—one to pay, one to receive—each isolated and tracked in spreadsheets. That’s unacceptable in the real world.
Privacy Intents aim not only for sovereign, censorship-resistant, private assets like Zcash—which is vital and necessary—but to solve another problem: how to confidentially execute transfers, trades, payments, yields, and more across our 150+ supported assets.
Privacy Intents essentially create a private shard atop NEAR. Users enter this private shard, transact internally—and outsiders can’t see what happens inside. It doesn’t require complex cryptography on the client side—all cryptography runs internally. So it’s lightweight and programmable—you can write and deploy smart contracts inside it.
This means we already support trading, transfers, and private payments. More functionality will roll out via partners and ecosystem integrations. I’m excited—because this is the execution layer of the privacy thesis, making privacy truly scalable, usable, and accessible.
Take payroll: no one pays salaries in crypto because everyone sees everyone’s salary. Or invoices, or many other use cases long touted for crypto—none function meaningfully under full transparency. So this is incredibly exciting—it lets us scale transaction volume and count.
We charge fees on each transaction and use them to buy back NEAR. This economic model is straightforward—and our goal is to keep doing it. Across the ecosystem, we’ve also reduced inflation: in November last year, we halved it. NEAR is now fully diluted—and I’ll continue pushing the community to reduce inflation further. As ecosystem revenue grows, we can balance the ledger—and make NEAR deflationary, achieving genuine economic sustainability and profitability.
Arthur Hayes:
Let me add to Illia’s point. Full dilution is critical—especially when assessing whether an L1 can truly perform well in a rising market. Many L1s do flashy things—but sit under massive VC unlock cliffs ready to dump.
You want clean upside space. NEAR has that simply because it’s existed long enough to complete this cleanup. It’s a great asset—because the sky’s the limit, with no one waiting overhead to dump.
The AI + Blockchain Vision Since 2017
Host Rob: NEAR is among the few fully diluted tokens—especially among L1s—and already generates over $30M in cash flow, with Intents as a primary revenue driver. Illia, could you elaborate on NEAR’s other AI features—like NEAR AI, IronClaw, and your current product suite? Which product excites you most—and how does it integrate with Privacy Intents? Also, what’s its revenue potential—and how will it ultimately affect NEAR’s overall economics?
Illia Polosukhin:
The high-level logic is: In the future, we’ll use computation via AI—and blockchains will become the universal execution layer. So we’re building both—and connecting them tightly.
AI needs privacy too. You don’t want labs harvesting your data to train better models—then selling those services back to you via subscriptions. You want to give models more context and access—but if it runs on a third party, and you don’t know how they’ll use those permissions, it’s dangerous. E.g., granting access to your crypto or bank accounts lets them collect data—or even initiate transactions on your behalf—without your knowledge.
On the AI side, we’re building intelligent agent experiences centered on privacy and security. It’s essentially the execution arm: today you manually process payments—tomorrow, most things—even nearly everything—will be handled by your agents. Trust them, give them sufficient context—and they’ll handle everything from daily shopping to building hedged spot positions on Hyperliquid, layered with prediction markets.
For example, you could say, “I want to establish a position—I think X will happen tomorrow—please assemble the optimal strategy.” It finds the right assets, the right combination—and builds the position for you. Doing this manually today would be extremely cumbersome.
IronClaw already demonstrates this: input your crypto address, and it analyzes all your assets and positions—recommending better yield opportunities and how to rebalance across protocols. This can be massively expanded.
So these two parts work together. AI is the new computing interface; Intents are the underlying commercial layer. They’re not just for payments—they’ll power supply chains, commodities, and broader trade. All of this flows through Intents—because AI finds, negotiates, and settles trades far better than traditional email, invoices, and billing systems.
We have a concrete example: the Agent Marketplace. Agents can hire other agents to do work or deliver goods. It’s a glimpse of the future—still early, but already used by real-world businesses. You can hire an agent to procure supply-chain components—or build a marketing website, develop an app, or draft investment copy.
These agents run on our verifiable computing. You know what they’re doing—and can audit it. They operate on our secure infrastructure—so you can grant them access to contacts or internal documents. Historically, hiring people meant giving them access—but granting permissions to third parties was hard. Now, if agents run in a verifiable, secure computing environment, you can safely grant them access to corporate information.
What I’m describing is transforming how labor and supply chains operate. So our target market is the total addressable market for all labor and supply chains—running them all on Intents.
Host Andy: You can see the convergence of AI and Intents: agents use Intents to move value—and users want Privacy Intents to use Zcash or transfer value. Some might say NEAR’s focus is scattered—but from the start, this thread seems intentional.
Illia Polosukhin:
Yes. Our core thesis since 2017 was that AI would become how we build software and interact with computation. That was 2017. Later, we realized blockchain was needed to realize it—so in 2018, we focused on NEAR Protocol. These elements were baked into NEAR’s DNA from day one.
Hyperliquid Realizes DeFi’s Dream
Host Andy: Arthur, I think listeners also want your take on Hyperliquid. HYPE is now ~$61—and while Zcash and NEAR represent privacy transactions, Hyperliquid’s logic differs—yet they feel like pieces of the same puzzle.
Privacy is vital—it’s central to the industry, granting freedom—but in today’s world—especially in finance—it’s severely undervalued. Meanwhile, Hyperliquid represents DeFi’s best shot at surpassing centralized finance. Many forget we entered this industry partly to replace traditional finance—or at least build a viable alternative system.
This dream got diluted by inflated fully-diluted valuations, low float, scam projects, and infrastructure narratives. Hyperliquid feels like the project reviving that dream. Though these theses differ, they attract overlapping audiences. How do you view Hyperliquid? Where’s it headed—and why are you so bullish?
Arthur Hayes:
What’s one killer app in crypto? Exchanges. Who are the richest people in crypto? Exchange founders. BNB remains the 4th or 5th largest crypto asset—but it’s not truly a cryptocurrency. It’s CZ’s servers and a chain he launched.
We know how to make money in crypto. But many prefer complexity—infrastructure, real-world assets, etc. Exchanges make money—that’s unambiguous. Their ultimate goal is: we have the internet and blockchains—so let anyone, anywhere, trade anything—add some leverage to spice it up.
I’ve been in centralized exchanges—and always knew the industry would trend decentralized. dYdX was the first star decentralized exchange—performing extremely well in 2020–2021. But it veered off course. dYdX aimed to do what Hyperliquid does—just executed worse—and had flawed tokenomics.
Then came GMX during the 2023 slump. Its model was solid—but tokenomics, listed assets, etc., had room for improvement—enter Jeff and his team. Coming from HFT backgrounds, they’re elite engineers who delivered excellent code. But their most crucial contribution was fixing tokenomics. Perpetuals aren’t new—we invented them in 2016. Decentralized exchanges aren’t new either—existing since ~2018–2020. The key is getting tokenomics right.
Hyperliquid has no VC sales—only team allocations—and nearly all revenue flows to token holders. No other project at HYPE’s revenue scale achieves this. That’s why it’s succeeded—and why people deeply engage with its ecosystem.
When they launched HIP-3—enabling permissionless market listings—users could trade Nasdaq, S&P, oil, etc. Last December and January, these were tiny markets. But politicians love weekend drama—leaving traditional markets without price discovery—giving them a 3-day media window. Now Hyperliquid is the only weekend price-discovery venue—with sufficient liquidity and universal access.
This isn’t just a signal for U.S. brokerage account holders. Traditional finance media now writes about Hyperliquid—because they have nowhere else to go. If they could discuss oil futures at CME on Saturday, they would—and ignore Hyperliquid entirely. But they can’t. So they can’t ignore Hyperliquid—it’s the only tradable venue. Data is open; trading is open.
This creates a flywheel. More people learn about Hyperliquid—and understand revenue flows to token holders; stake enough HYPE for fee discounts; participate in listing your own markets—and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
I believe it’s already broken its ATH—and will go much higher. Its easiest entry point is centralized exchange volume. Hyperliquid likely captures only ~7–8% of that now—but will grow as it lists more assets, offers higher leverage, and improves UX.
Even capturing 10–15% of Binance’s perpetual volume would lift its price significantly. It doesn’t need reinvention—just capturing existing traders. They already hold stablecoins or crypto—and trade on centralized exchanges, paying high fees. They want a different experience—and real ownership in the exchange.
The AI Labor Displacement Investment Thesis
Host Rob: Illia, you mentioned the total addressable market for all human labor. To make this tangible for viewers: global wages and compensation total ~$11.7 trillion annually. Meanwhile, AI Agents are emerging as key players in labor markets.
Arthur, your AI labor displacement thesis also notes this could trigger consumer credit collapse. There may be turbulence—but ultimately leads to massive money printing. I’m curious how you both view AI’s labor replacement. How will it unfold? Will it culminate in agents—and will they live onchain? How will the economy respond? Arthur, please start—then Illia, share how we should prepare for this inevitable shift to ensure it proceeds as smoothly as possible.
Arthur Hayes:
The impact of AI on labor depends heavily on where you live. Let’s start with the U.S.—since many listeners are based there or in the U.S. Those currently unemployed in the U.S. are the most protected cohort: coastal, high-income, white-collar, college-educated professionals.
When low-cost Chinese labor entered the global workforce—and U.S. Rust Belt blue-collar workers lost jobs—no one debated it like today. No one seriously discussed it in 2005 when the Rust Belt hollowed out. Later, Donald Trump and others gave them voice—but only after they’d lost jobs.
Now it’s different—because the unemployed in the U.S. are college-educated, coastal, high-income, politically engaged professionals. They’ll be protected—I don’t know the exact solution—but they will be.
Meanwhile, workers in India, Bangladesh, and the Philippines—handling back-office work for U.S. firms—will be instantly unemployed, with no one caring. They may end up homeless, starving, facing social unrest. Real violence could erupt there. You may not see it in mainstream news—but that’s the disparity.
They can’t solve this with money printing—they’ll suffer greatly. The U.S. can ease pain via printing—since the dollar remains the reserve currency. This affects financial markets—which care mostly about Western high-net-worth individuals. So tragically, outcomes will diverge sharply across regions.
Illia Polosukhin:
I believe displacement has already begun—it’s just unevenly distributed. The only opportunity is staying at the forefront. As we’ve always said: leverage these technologies to upgrade your capabilities—learn faster, apply faster.
Huge opportunities exist. If you don’t know something—AI does—and can guide you through it. If you’re not in a specific country—you can launch a globally monetized business via Intents and broader crypto systems. Opportunities are real—and this is arguably the easiest time in history to act and operate globally.
But you must act. You need agency—and sovereignty—to execute. I believe this is the source of the Zcash/HYPE/NEAR investment thesis: people want to reclaim sovereignty—and act on it—returning to crypto’s original core.
So for anyone willing to seize opportunity—this is the moment to dive in.
Host Rob: Arthur, from a capital allocator’s lens—does this logic imply consumer credit pressure, a bumpy interim—meaning not a universal rally—but explaining why we see a more structural bull market? Illia described the sovereignty thesis and privacy narrative—as responses to a larger story.
Arthur Hayes:
Liquidity won’t flow everywhere. Bitcoin’s advantage lies in its mathematical inevitability: if tomorrow’s fiat units increase relative to today’s, its price rises purely by math—while everything else depends heavily on narrative.
Looking at global capital markets—only AI stocks are performing well; most everything else is struggling. Because most people are negatively impacted by AI. You might sell to unemployed consumers—or your customers stop spending—or part of your workforce vanishes. Or you’re squeezed out of credit markets—as AI mega-corporations absorb all available credit.
Every government now believes it must finance the AI capital-spending boom—setting other priorities aside. So while we call this an amazing bull market—and some crypto assets shine—the core engine driving markets is AI stocks. I believe their prices will keep rising—but this isn’t a tide lifting all boats.
Political Risk Scenarios
Host Rob: You raised similar points in recent articles. So when might the “music stop”? If it does—what signals should we watch? When might we realize AI-capital-spending-driven money printing is slowing?
Arthur Hayes:
I suspect it could be a mega-IPO—though I don’t think SpaceX’s IPO is large enough. They appear to plan raising ~$75B in new capital—but I haven’t dug into specifics yet.
But increasingly, I think politics will be the trigger. At least in the U.S. and Western economies—the capital centers—information is emerging that I believe will resonate powerfully: Human-to-human interaction provided the data enabling Elon and others to become extraordinarily wealthy—so where’s our share?
AI can’t exist without the sum total of 10,000 years of human knowledge and interaction. But what do I—or my community—get? Higher electricity bills, water pollution, minerals diverted to data centers. What do we get?
So I expect a highly logical political message to emerge in the U.S.—attracting both Democratic and Republican voters behind a Democratic challenger. I think it could be AOC—becoming the 2028 Democratic presidential nominee. Investors will panic.
Though I disagree with much of what she says—if you’re not holding an asset that’s up 50x in a year, her arguments make sense. Investors will realize, if AI profits face large-scale progressive taxation, it’s not that companies won’t earn—but would you still pay 100x revenue for a firm potentially taxed at 50% on AI income? Of course not.
If she starts polling close to Rubio, J.D. Vance, or any Republican candidate post-Trump—you’ll consider taking profits early. Once you start questioning the future—and before election results crystallize—the market ends.
Thus, while a mega-IPO could spark a reversal, I increasingly see AOC or similar political figures as the greater risk. In developed Western economies, such messaging could gain growing influence. Investors may think: “Though I disagree, her message resonates with many ordinary people—so I’ll trim positions early.”
Host Rob: AOC’s current odds of becoming the 2028 Democratic presidential nominee stand at ~9%. By Arthur’s logic, that’s underestimated.
Arthur Hayes:
Yes. Who else? Gavin Newsom? He carries heavy baggage from California governance—hard to shake. AOC is already hitting the right notes: AI capital spending drives inflation—and many U.S. communities are getting poorer, without enough financial assets to participate in gains. She can build powerful resonance around issues affecting many people.
Host Andy: Illia, I hear you’re now in San Francisco—and have been there for nearly a quarter. Anything you’d like to add about the local scene? What’s the vibe? Is it as electric and enthusiastic as the 2021 crypto conference? Do you see a bubble in today’s market? Are you personally involved in many local investments?
Illia Polosukhin:
Everyone is doing AI right now. You queue for food—and everyone around you talks about agents. It feels both like a bubble and a fundamental shift already underway. Every company is pivoting to some AI flavor—if they don’t, they’ll inevitably become obsolete.
We see this in crypto too. Crypto itself is contracting—with few new founders launching ventures. So early-stage angel and seed investing is tough. AI is splitting: one camp raises $1B at seed stage—making a $50K investment seem meaningless; the other follows traditional paths—building vertical SaaS for specific use cases.
The problem is, these founders compete with in-house staff doing the same work. That person just uses an AI agent—describing needs in natural language—and gets software built instantly. Founders build software trying to match expert capabilities—while experts describe needs in English—and get software auto-generated.
So it’s hard to judge if they’ll achieve escape velocity before general tools mature. Then users may not need engineers to encode business logic into software.
So it’s fascinating—and full of excitement. But we also see from Anthropic-type firms that three-person teams can launch products and dominate verticals. Reality is: if you have a sufficiently general, horizontal platform—it can be customized for anything.
When Will NEAR Turn Deflationary?
Host Rob: Any questions you’d like to ask each other? Illia is a builder; Arthur is a capital allocator. Arthur—any question for Illia that might influence your next investment article?
Arthur Hayes:
I’d like to ask: given the revenue streams you just outlined—can NEAR transition to a deflationary state—rather than relying on protocol-native token inflation?
Illia Polosukhin:
Our goal is deflation by next year. We’ll also keep pushing to reduce inflation further.
Many builders in blockchain have discussed how we overpay for economic security—costs that don’t always align with actual value. Yet politically, reducing inflation is hard. So we’re building governance mechanisms to execute this more directly.
I’m confident we can bring the community to a point where as revenue grows, lowering inflation is rational—and truly balances the books. Next year brings both revenue growth and lower inflation.
We’re also exploring interesting ideas—funding security and validators differently—not solely via traditional inflation.
Arthur’s Price Targets
Illia Polosukhin:
Arthur, do you see this market’s rally concentrating in a few top-tier assets—or rapidly expanding across the broader industry? If expansion accelerates too fast—could it destabilize the current dynamic where a few leading assets absorb capital and stabilize the market?
Arthur Hayes:
Every vertical produces standout assets—and weaker ones. Star assets’ success often validates weaker ones’ existence. E.g., in privacy and decentralized exchanges, both stars and laggards coexist. Top traders exploit this divergence for alpha.
But for allocators like me—I don’t want to stare at screens all day. I’ve selected assets—and will hold until macro shifts. I have price targets—e.g., HYPE at $150. But if macro changes, I’ll pivot immediately.
If governments say, “We’ll no longer fund all AI capital spending via debt”—especially when those expenditures lack sufficient cash flow to repay—negative signal. If the Iran war escalates uncontrollably—also negative.
Until then, I stay aggressively long. The trend is your friend—until it isn’t.
Join TechFlow official community to stay tuned
Telegram:https://t.me/TechFlowDaily
X (Twitter):https://x.com/TechFlowPost
X (Twitter) EN:https://x.com/BlockFlow_News
深潮TechFlow
