The fundamental issue with consumer crypto today is lack of consumers. 

Consumers need interesting or entertaining content to stick around.

Sign ups are irrelevant if you can’t retain them.

Everything else is a marginal improvement at best.

“Consumer” seems like a bad frame? More like prosumers?

True industrial style consumers will never pay in marginal inconvenience for what-if benefits like censorship resistance, and crypto will always be more inconvenient than non-crypto equivalents. 

But people who produce as well as consume tolerate and even welcome inconvenience. That’s why devtools have worse UXes. They also value things like CR more because more is riding on not being censored etc. People with more to lose spend more on insurance.

Blogger at ribbonfarm.com, running summerofprotocols.com, host of /gloom ☀️

I don’t think it will ever be. Head on competition is always on incumbent terms. Disruptor job is to redefine the terms of the contest in the live UX itself. For eg data ownership is a feature crypto can win on but is an irrelevant insurance type feature in the what-if UX. But “your nfts show up on other services” is a winning live UX feature web2 can’t even compete in. Otoh “central T&S moderation” is unwinnable against web2 as bluesky found out the hard way. You’ll never provision a better version of that than web2. So you have to convince consumers to stop caring about it.

Yeah that’s certainly where we need to focus in the near term.

But at some point needs to be as good as web2 if it matters