You bought a Ledger Nano S. But hey, you thought you were being clever, stashing your untouchable crypto in cold storage, yeah? Hodling for the long haul. Inspired by the potential of a decentralized future, one not dominated by the centralized gatekeeping and planned obsolescence. Then BAM! Ledger pulls the rug. Now, the device you relied on, the one that added confidence to your experience, is on its way out the door. "Still works," they say. But still works isn't good enough. It’s a betrayal, and it’s indicative of a deeply dangerous trend for the whole crypto space.

Planned Obsolescence Hits Crypto Hard

Let's be real: this isn't about technical limitations. It's about profit. Memory constraints? Please. We’ve witnessed the extraordinary processing power and storage of phones on sale for pennies compared to the Nano S. This isn’t so much about convincing you to purchase the latest, greatest, more expensive model. It's the Apple business model applied to crypto security, and it's disgusting. It sounds like the same corporate greed crypto was touted as being able to break the shackles of. Now, imagine purchasing a digital vault. Now imagine the bank were to change the locks every few years and require you to buy an entirely new vault every time!

And what about that measly 20% discount? A kick in the teeth to long-time customers who took a risk on Ledger’s dream from the beginning. It’s akin to providing a rebate on a new saddle after your horse has already been sent to pasture. After all, you’re not simply selling hardware; you’re selling trust. And that trust has been shattered.

Security Concerns Skyrocket Unchecked

"Still works" is a lie of omission. Yes, perhaps you can manage to buy and spend Bitcoin for a bit. But what about the unaddressed security vulnerabilities? On the contrary, what about the bugs that can’t be fixed? Ledger is essentially saying, "We know there might be problems, but we're not going to bother fixing them." But this is a huge security threat, not only for Nano S users, but for the entire crypto ecosystem.

It would be like driving around in a car that the factory no longer supports. It can keep operating for years, but for every mile you travel it’s a crapshoot. Each transaction you carry out on an unsupported Nano S is an attack vector. The wait makes you increasingly vulnerable. To be clear, this isn’t about being inconvenient, this is about risking your entire portfolio.

Crypto's Accessibility Gets Gatekept

The Nano S was relatively affordable. It served as an onramp for millions of people into the world of hardware wallets and self-custody. So now Ledger is forcing customers to upgrade to more expensive models like the Nano X or Stax. This would result in a two-tiered system. Those who can spend the most money will get the highest level of security, and those who can’t will be left with a potentially exploitable device. Where is the decentralization in it?

This is especially detrimental to marginalized communities and those in developing countries where every dollar matters. Crypto was marketed as one of the platforms to help level the playing field, not add another obstacle in the way of wealth creation. In 2024, Ledger will discontinue support for its first hardware wallet, the Nano S. This decision sends a very clear message to most users “You’re not worth our time.”

You might argue, "It's just a few bucks more for a newer model." But that's missing the point. It's about principle. It's about access. It’s about making sure that anybody, no matter what their net worth, can be part of the crypto revolution.

Long-Term HODL'ing is Now a Myth?

Perhaps the greatest lures of hardware wallets are their long-term storage promise. You purchase a hardware device, store your keys on it and forget about them for years, potentially decades. Ledger’s decision makes such a promise difficult, if not impossible. Because if hardware wallets will become useless every 5-10 years, then they’re just a waste of time and energy. The software wallet/custodial solution trap Considering the software wallet/custodial solutions on the market.

The beauty of Bitcoin, and crypto in general, is that it allows for a quiet generational wealth transfer. You can leave your long-term capital gains crypto wealth to your kids and grandkids. Now, they’re going to be able to enjoy these new assets for decades to come! However, if the hardware wallets that store those holdings become irrelevant, that whole vision goes up in smoke.

This isn't just about the Nano S. It's about the future of crypto storage. Are hardware wallets really safe enough to be counting on them for decades? Or are they just the latest version of planned obsolescence in sheep’s clothing, pretending to be innovation?

Community Solidarity is Now More Vital

Ledger's move is a wake-up call. It’s a reminder that we — the crypto community — need to hold these companies accountable. We need to demand better. We should be fostering open-source alternatives, supporting user rights to repair their tech, and so on.

It’s high time we looked to other hardware wallets that focus on long-term support, legacy access, and open-source transparency. It's time to support developers who are building open-source solutions that can't be controlled by a single company. It's time to remember the core principles of crypto: decentralization, self-sovereignty, and community.

The Nano S betrayal, availability be damned, is the beginning of a very welcome reckoning. Retrofitting a shared understanding of green priorities into the crypto world’s DNA would be a meaningful start toward creating a more sustainable and equitable crypto future. Don't let Ledger's greed define the industry. Let’s go out there and flex some community power. Together, let’s make sure that in our future, security is a right, not a privilege. And let's do it together.