Why do people think "doing the same as X but 'with blockchain' instead of paper" means "legally different from X"? If doing X is illegal, adding blockchain to

Why do people think "doing the same as X but 'with blockchain' instead of paper" means "legally different from X"? If doing X is illegal, adding blockchain to it doesn't magically mean you're not doing X. If doing X means you have to pay taxes, doing X with linked lists doesn't mean you don't have to pay taxes. If doing X means you have a bunch of liabilities, then doing X on a block chain means you have a bunch of liabilities. The only thing that makes a DAO different from a partnership is that decision making is arguably public on the blockchain, instead of an email thread. Again, why would you think that doing it on a blockchain makes it different from email, or in person, or whatever. Now in fairness, I certainly didn't think of DAOs as being an unlimited partnership, but that's largely because I didn't think about it because they seem fairly pointless. As the court seems to be saying a DAO is fairly clearly a partnership, and they very deliberately terminated the LLC and didn't create an LLP, so the lack of liability protection follows logically from that.