This is a false dichotomy. There is a big middle ground between "cover for users engaging in whatever risky behavior they like" and "cover for nothing whatsoev

This is a false dichotomy. There is a big middle ground between "cover for users engaging in whatever risky behavior they like" and "cover for nothing whatsoever". In this case, the problem is expecting users to be perfectly diligent, and either discard all convenience or all security. Cryptocurrency continues to be a case study demonstrating why so many of the systems it's trying (unsuccessfully) to replace operate in ways that it doesn't.