The concept of Friend.tech may still seem novel and exciting - to some.
But I firmly believe that the commodification of the social graph is not a good thing. And I won't participate, as either an investor or an influencer.
My primary objection to Friend.tech is the inherent dehumanization that comes with treating people as commodities. The idea of buying and selling "shares" in a person is deeply troubling, and it reduces individuals to objects of investment rather than complex, flawed and brilliantly inconsistent human beings.
The Friend.tech mindset is not only ethically questionable - it has the potential to make already unhealthy investor/KOL relationships in crypto even more codependent, and enshittify interactions within the ecosystem.
The notion of granting access to private chat forums based on the ownership of "shares" creates a hierarchy that privileges wealth over genuine connection. This system perpetuates the idea that one's worth is determined by one's market value rather than one's intrinsic value as a person. It’s a toxic dynamic that will only lead to a toxic environment where folks are more focused on maximizing their investment returns than building meaningful relationships. And God knows, crypto has more than enough of that to begin with.
Buying, selling and speculating on access to individuals will open the door to harassment and abuse, as users feel entitled to certain interactions or information based on their "ownership" of another person's "shares." It was bad enough when this was about NFTs. When that same speculative emotional dysregulation is applied to humans, it won’t end well.
Beyond the ethical/philosophical quagmire, Friend.tech has a dangerous lack of privacy and a ridiculously high potential for exploitation. The platform's legal status is murky, and it launched without a clear privacy policy or any answers to questions about how user data is collected, stored, and used. Regardless of how the platform has attempted to catch up, it has displayed a cavalier attitude toward some critical aspects of its product.
Finally, as a solo creator looking to build a long-term career in this space, I believe that the opportunity cost of launching a token—even in the form of a Friend.tech key—is simply not worth it. The allure of quick profits and increased visibility is tempting, particularly for creators still reeling from the last crash.
But the risks and drawbacks far outweigh the benefits.
The success of any creator on Friend.tech is highly unpredictable and likely to be short-lived. Influencers rise and fall in popularity. It’s not about the flavour of the month, it’s about the flavour of the moment. Even if a token experiences a sudden surge in value, it is unlikely to sustain that growth over an extended period.
Tying a personal brand to a volatile and short-lived token/key will have lasting negative consequences. If—not when—the key inevitably fails to live up to expectations or experiences a significant decline in value, the creator's reputation will be permanently damaged. Dissatisfied traders and investors will direct violent frustration and anger towards the creator, making life hell.
Even if a key achieves a measure of success, it won’t provide the long-term financial stability and growth that a solo creator needs to build a sustainable career. The resources and attention required to launch and maintain a Friend.tech community where people buy a key once and expect continuous financial reward and gain, could be better spent developing valuable subscription-based content, cultivating genuine relationships with followers, and exploring more stable and reliable recurring revenue streams.
When creators encourage their followers to invest in what is essentially a highly speculative and potentially risky asset, they prioritise their own benefit over the financial well-being of their audience. This isn't a momentary breach of trust—we’re talking about undercutting the creator's overall credibility.
This has serious consequences, not just financially, but for the relationship between the creators and their community. The trust that takes years to build can be lost instantly, and once lost, in some cases, it can never be regained.
A creator's ability to cultivate a loyal and supportive community is the only foundation for a stable career. But instead of enabling a bond based on mutual respect and shared interests, Friend.tech promotes a transactional relationship where the audience's loyalty is bought and sold.
The Friend.tech model is fundamentally flawed. It operates on an assumption that people are commodities to be traded, a corrosive mindset that damages and devalues genuine human connection. Instead of propagating models like this, we should support and promote platforms that respect who we are as individuals, audiences, and influencers. We should at least attempt to create a healthy, sustainable ecosystem instead of abandoning all hope and embracing a PVP arena.
- Loading comments...