I’m not saying it is or it isn’t. The thesis of the article is that it is, and the reasoning they provide is consistent with the definition of a ponzi scheme. S

I’m not saying it is or it isn’t. The thesis of the article is that it is, and the reasoning they provide is consistent with the definition of a ponzi scheme. So it’s consistent and your reasoning is no better than theirs until we have more evidence (ie it fails or it becomes the cornerstone of a long lived vibrant ecosystem)