Bennett Hoffman traces his path from a childhood love of video games and early exposure to C++ in eighth grade, through dropping out of college to work at Microsoft, where he first learned about Bitcoin around 2010. After early ventures, including a parkour documentary and a rejected Y Combinator podcasting pitch, Hoffman co-founded Buttercoin, a Bitcoin exchange backed by Y Combinator and Google Ventures. Buttercoin shut down not from hacks or lost funds but from an inability to secure US regulatory licenses fast enough, despite an offer from Chamath Palihapitiya's Social Capital contingent on relocating overseas. Hoffman reflects on early ideas like autonomous cars using Bitcoin micropayments, discusses why liquidity and censorship resistance remain Bitcoin's core value, and explains his evolving view on DeFi as a democratizing force against financial gatekeepers rather than governments. He also shares candid thoughts on Ethereum's Turing complete promise, questioning whether on chain execution is truly necessary, while remaining cautiously optimistic about DeFi's emerging real world use cases.
Buttercoin co-founder Bennett Hoffman on Bitcoin's early days, Buttercoin's regulatory demise, and why DeFi democratizes finance.
Can you share your backstory before and after discovering Bitcoin?
I got into software young because I wanted to make video games, learning C++ in eighth grade. I dropped out of college to join Microsoft, where I met Cedric and first heard about Bitcoin around early 2010. I initially thought it sounded like sci-fi credits, tried to find flaws in it, and when I couldn't, I got hooked. I eventually sold my early coins before starting Buttercoin.
What happened with Buttercoin, the exchange you started?
We started Buttercoin in 2013 through Y Combinator, backed by Google Ventures and other quality VCs. We have the somewhat dubious distinction of being the only Bitcoin exchange to go out of business without losing customer funds or getting hacked. We just couldn't raise money fast enough to get regulatory licenses in the US, so we shut down rather than risk jail.
Did Social Capital's Chamath Palihapitiya almost invest in Buttercoin?
We were talking to Chamath at Social Capital, and one of his conditions for considering investment would have been for us to leave the US and build in Singapore or somewhere similar. In retrospect that was probably a good idea, but our mission was to be a carrier for the Bitcoin meme into regulated financial space to help institutional adoption, so I'm not sure we'd have taken that path anyway.
Looking back, were there pivots that could have saved Buttercoin?
One idea was issuing only crypto trading without touching fiat, since it was an open question whether that would still trigger the same regulatory framework, though we now know the answer is yes. We also explored something we called the Butter Board, essentially an early non-custodial DEX concept, but this was pre-Ethereum, so it probably wasn't technically viable yet, unlike something like Uniswap today.
You mentioned the idea of autonomous cars using Bitcoin. Can you explain that?
The idea was that self-driving cars would need to pay for parking or micro-transactions like letting other cars pass. With Bitcoin, this could be permissionless as a protocol, rather than requiring partnerships with companies like Tesla or Uber. This was before Lightning or multisig via P2SH existed, so it was pretty pie in the sky at the time, but it's closer to reality now with payment channels.
How has your perspective on Bitcoin's core value proposition evolved, especially regarding DeFi?
I'm a soft Bitcoin maximalist, believing censorship resistance and liquidity are its core value, letting you move wealth across regulatory regimes by memorizing 24 words. DeFi gave me another perspective: the people you need protection from are less scary, more like Goldman Sachs than the Federal Reserve. DeFi democratizes access to financial instruments previously gatekept by accredited investor rules, letting anyone earn five to ten percent on stablecoins instead of losing money to inflation in a savings account.
What are your thoughts on Ethereum's Turing complete, smart contract approach?
When I first heard about Ethereum I was excited because it promised a lot, and I'm still optimistic since it's finding real use cases now with DeFi. But I'm less bullish on the world computer metaphor being the right approach. I haven't gone deep on Ethereum 2.0, but my core question is how important it actually is for contract execution itself to happen on chain versus off chain with published proofs.
Building something daring? Sunny talks to founders like this every day. Fifteen minutes to see if your story belongs on the stage.
Claim your pre-interview