The history of the entire internet has always been politicized. The ARPANET emerged against the backdrop of the Cold War, with state-supported research and development aimed at countering Soviet technology. However, the early internet creators were precisely liberals who, although they received military funding, opposed control and emphasized the free flow of information. They conceptually viewed themselves as capitalists rather than socialists, as technological romantics rather than authoritarians and controllers. Therefore, the technological environment must be characterized by Decentralization and knowledge sharing.

If the internet had developed in the Soviet Union instead of the United States, it might have become a central nervous system, evolving into a real-time control system for better implementation of planned economy. We are fortunate that the internet was initially driven by relatively free individuals.

Human nature requires the storage of value, but suitable storage carriers cannot be found. What should be used at this time? One way is to financialize the things used for storage, such as real estate, stocks, and securities, which seem to be transferable; another way is to use gold and currency as things that can store value. Therefore, hoarding Bitcoin is not a new model but a return. Bitcoin has called back the inherent nature of humans to store value.

It is Bitcoin that has subsumed the United States, not the United States that has subsumed Bitcoin, because Bitcoin has not changed; it is the United States that has changed. The United States needs to change its legislation in order to incorporate Bitcoin, but the protocols and programs of Bitcoin have not been specially updated for Americans or for Trump. On the contrary, Bitcoin will increasingly influence the dollar, as the United States treats Bitcoin as a reservoir for the dollar, and we are moving towards a Bitcoin standard.

Meme coins are the cyber parades.

Can the Bitcoin limit be increased? Or can it be shut down? Yes. As long as everyone agrees, it can happen. When we say it is stable, it is not absolutely stable in a purely mathematical sense; this stability comes from both mathematics and people's faith in it, as well as a relative expectation of future society.

Trump issuing a currency can also be a good thing for those who believe in liberalism. We all believe in Hayek's idea of "The Denationalization of Money," advocating that individuals and companies should also be able to issue currency; that's how a market economy should work. Currency is just a type of commodity and should not be monopolized by any individual or institution. Since anyone is allowed to issue a currency, that person can certainly be Trump. In the short term, this will affect the market, as everyone rushes to profit from it, and once the easy profits are gone, the market may indeed struggle. However, in the long run, it can be considered a progress for liberalism. Issuing currency in a very cheap way demystifies the act of issuing currency, and can also be seen as a form of ideological liberation.

Today, finance has come down from its pedestal, and those who trade cryptocurrencies are no different from those playing finance on Wall Street. The internet celebrity economy is an economy of emotions, but emotions are invisible and intangible; they cannot be found anywhere. Now, through this token, emotions are being transformed into something tradable.