> The problem with cryptocurrency is that it attracts a lot of shitty people.
I think it's fairly well accepted that that's a problem with currency in general. There's a reason we have the perception that wall street is populated entirely by douche bags, and that's because while even though not all of them are, a sizable portion are.
Yet modern finance has hundreds of years of regulations on its back. Obviously, with differing outcomes/quality, but it is there.
Cryptocurrency is still wholly unregulated for the most part and any person can start a currency. I suspect this draws in a certain type of person. See the various 'hacked bitcoin exchanges' that were just founders running away with the money, for example. There's no FDIC here or even any law enforcement options, especially if the hosting was off-shore.
Sure. I just see cryptocurrency more as an esoteric investment vehicle than a currency, because I don't use it so I often forget it's capabilities as an actual currency. In that respect, it's not all that different to my eyes than complex derivatives in the early 2000s. In both cases we have overly complex systems that very few people truly understand, backed by real money through people investing.
I think people that are interested in just making money, over most/all other considerations (such as having a fulfilling career, or serving some need), gravitate towards industries where they are closer to direct money. Finance is one of those areas, so we get more people in that area that aren't as adverse to breaking a few rules or screwing some people over.
I agree regulation would solve some of the problems of cryptocurrency, but the cost would be to lose a lot of the benefits of a cryptocurrency, to the point where I'm not sure the use case of it anymore. What does a regulated cryptocurrency get you that you can't achieve through a more traditional, centralized currency system? I think people just need more education on what to expect, which is something that's fundamentally a little different than centralized currency, and part of that education needs to be about risk.
I think their point still stands - sure there's regulations, but that's just added bureaucracy and history on top of an arbitrary system. I won't pretend like it doesn't work - clearly it does - but something like the USD is extremely vulnerable as well if "the system" goes down - hyper inflation, hyper deflation, currency rejection (people want chickens not dollars), etc.
I think it's fairly well accepted that that's a problem with currency in general. There's a reason we have the perception that wall street is populated entirely by douche bags, and that's because while even though not all of them are, a sizable portion are.