Yes, on the surface, but they cherry-pick arguments and conveniently jump over the interesting alternatives.
> It's impossible to fully understand without complex technological and financial knowledge
Sure, now ask your mom how Web2 works. How does a phishing website work using web1 tech? I'd say anything under the hood for non tech people is close to magic. But that's not an issue, they don't need to know everything starting from how DNS routing works, but the article somehow suggests that they do.
The only fair point here is that it's indeed more complex.
> It is actively harming the environment
So, what about the projects that don't use PoW?
> It profits off of artificial scarcity
Ummm, this is the point of NFT, this bangs an open door.
They know they cannot stop the web3 nonsense, which is why everyday they post these complaint posts all the time and it is really futile.
What is really going to happen is similar to what the SEC and other equivalent regulators already did with ICOs and they will just classify them as securities. Even when they did that, we still have the scams, pump and dumps and VC insiders dumping on retail as a way to escape the ICO ban.
It is not going to go away completely as the article is suggesting, but the regulators can start with putting an end to what the VCs and insiders getting tons of exchanges to list tokens they've invested in and dump on retail.
The nore revolutionary potential that something has, the more hate and oppression it will face, especially from less open-mindeds and conservatives.
More people hating it is the validation of what it is capable of: a free and a truly semantic and transparent Internet that incentivizes actions correctly.
And the more hatred it gets (edit: proportional to downvotes), the more powerful it will become in the end. And we all know who wins at the end.
