I just want to say that I really appreciate the writing style in this article. I consider crypto a highly-politicized subject, but there are ways of talking abo

I just want to say that I really appreciate the writing style in this article. I consider crypto a highly-politicized subject, but there are ways of talking about such things without getting political. Specifically: But I also think that these proposed solutions are enormously attractive to people who see them as a tangible option in a world where these problems are not being solved—where we are being failed by our political establishments in so, so many ways. I may disagree with the author about where to place blame, but I think saying "political establishments" is more authentic than "the government". At least in the US, it's We the People. We're the government. So when I hear anti-government sentiments, I generally start to discount whatever it is that the person is saying. Especially in this era, when the main problem is concentrated wealth in private institutions and corporations, who unlike the government, operate outside of election oversight. Meaning we can't throw them out of office when they do wrong. And that's been my main concern with stuff like crypto. I feel the sentiment that the political establishment often lets us all down. But rather than creating an anarchist playground in crypto to get mathematically free of regulation, maybe it might have been good to put some energy into getting involved politically and solving the actual problems. Vote, raise money for non-establishment candidates, run for office, all that stuff. The long game for crypto looks like any other unregulated game: winner takes all. Perfect wealth inequality. Whatever edge I think I may have to skim a little capital out of that pool, would only end up being used to exacerbate inequality as I take from someone else. Which is why I feel that the original goal of crypto to empower people (by bypassing the rules of the system) is only going to backfire and make things worse. Just like with trickle-down economics, the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act or any other policy that claimed it would enrich all but only enriched some. We don't fix the evils of the system by feeding from it. We fix them by paying into the good, getting involved and doing the work.