It's interesting that you see "disrupting the banking system" as "ground-breaking" and obviously positive, while at the same time being uncertain as to how any

It's interesting that you see "disrupting the banking system" as "ground-breaking" and obviously positive, while at the same time being uncertain as to how any new system that replaces it will actually take shape. Why do you assume that the replacement will be net-positive? Likewise, you reference "decentralizing finance" as a positive thing that's occuring. However, to-date, this has been nothing but a mirage--as illusory as fractional-penny transaction fees and other promises. We're not even on a path to decentralization, and it's not a temporary aberation to be sorted out. It's actually the design, despite the ruse that tries to focus us on the idea that anyone could operate a node. Crypto is at least as centralized as traditional currency/finance. It only seeks to displace the incumbent financial class with a new one.