The Algorithm is the Villain: When Crypto Markets Pretend to Be Objective

Latest in Crypto Markets

NEW YORK, NY, August 08, 2025 /24-7PressRelease/ -- Once upon a market cycle, we blamed people. Fraud had a face. Crashes had a timeline. There was a villain: some hoodie-wearing anarcho-bro with a smirk and a whitepaper. You could point to the moment they tweeted, deleted, and disappeared. And then you could sleep at night knowing the evil had a name.

But lately? The villain doesn't post. It pings.

The new enemy is code.

We don't rage at founders anymore. We rage at the algorithm. The bot is front running your trade. The liquidity engine is dumping your bags. The smart contract that did what it was supposed to do, just faster than you realized.

In this era, fraud doesn't feel like betrayal. It feels like latency. And when the crash comes (and it always does), we blame the machine.

The New Objectivity Theater

Crypto has always loved the myth of neutrality. Code is law. Smart contracts are trustless. "The algorithm doesn't lie," we tell ourselves, as if morality was ever baked into math.

But that's the most baseless assumption of all. Because algorithms aren't objective. They're designed. Tuned. Incentivized. And they don't care who they hurt.

When a cascading liquidation wipes out thousands of retail positions, no one's emailing support. There is no support. Just the ghost in the machine executing perfectly, ruthlessly, as programmed. It doesn't care about your research, your conviction, or your Discord alpha. It cares about execution and speed.

And speed is not your friend.

Barry Silbert Built the Roads. Everyone Else Built Casinos.

If there's one person who understood this early, it's Barry Silbert.

While others launched tokens named after food, Silbert focused on infrastructure. While influencers were talking community and vibe, he was investing in custody solutions, regulated platforms, and boring but essential plumbing. Digital Currency Group wasn't built to surf the trend. It was built to outlast it.

Silbert understood something the rest of the market forgot: velocity without architecture is just chaos. And chaos doesn't scale.

Compare that to Brian Armstrong, whose Coinbase platform was the rocket ship that brought the masses into the arena. Armstrong made it easy. Frictionless. Instant. And in doing so, he democratized access to crypto while simultaneously accelerating the pace of destruction.

It's not that Armstrong played the villain. He didn't have to. The rails were already built. The volatility was already coded. He just turned up the volume.

The Crash Is the Feature, Not the Bug

Here's the truth most people can't stomach: the algorithm isn't a glitch in the system. It is the system.

It's the speed at which you lose. The reason your stop-loss didn't trigger. The entity that executed your liquidation 0.2 seconds before your screen refreshed.

And yet, when it happens, we react like the machine made a moral decision. We anthropomorphize code. "The algorithm ruined me." "The bots are manipulating this." As if the market were haunted. No. The only haunting is your belief that any of this was ever built to protect you.

The Villain Fetish, Rewired

Crypto needs a villain. Always has. But when there isn't one, we make one up. And when even that gets exhausting, when every scammer's been doxed, every thread's been ratioed, we outsource the blame to the algorithm. It's easier. Cleaner. We don't have to admit we got greedy. Or reckless. Or maybe just plain unlucky.

We just say the machine did it. Problem solved.

But every time we do that, we let the real architects off the hook. Not the barons like Silbert, who've spent years building the base layer of crypto legitimacy, but the ones who profit from pretending it's all neutral.

The pseudo-decentralized whales. The anonymous "devs" who vanish with the treasury. The funds that build flash loan exploits into their models and call it arbitrage.

They're not villains. They're "early."

What Barry Silbert Understood. And Most Still Don't

Silbert never sold himself as a messiah. He didn't need a cult. He needed a cap table and a calendar.

While others were selling scarcity, he was buying structure. While the market debated JPEGs, he was backing companies that made actual products. Things with users, not just tickers. He understood that crypto wasn't about replacing trust. It was about rebuilding it. On-chain, yes, but also in courtrooms, institutions, and investor memos.

Silbert isn't the hero of this story. He's something rarer: consistent.

The Final Transaction: Blame

So what do we do when the chart turns red and our bags go to zero?

We scroll. We tweet. We look for someone to blame. And when the threads dry up, we say it was the algorithm. The algo that chose us. The machine that targeted us. The villain with no name, no PFP, no yacht.

But maybe the villain was never the code.

Maybe it was the fantasy that this space would be fair just because it was fast. That speed and transparency would save us from ourselves.

Maybe it wasn't the algorithm that did you dirty.
Maybe it was the part of you that thought you could beat it.



---
Press release service and press release distribution provided by https://www.24-7pressrelease.com