Devil's advocate: are you really paying them for a service? I guess it depends on if you pay your bill in full each month, but for those that do pay in full, credit cards provide so many "free" benefits (travel perks, cash back, loss protection, extended warranties, so on). So for those, credit cards provide excellent services requiring no payment at all--it could almost be seen as a club with benefits that one joins, and if that's the case why not impose their moral compass onto its members (like most clubs do)?

That said, I generally agree with you.

None of those things are free to me. It's something in the range of %1-%3 of all I spend. Despite the fact that a lot of the time those charges are hidden in the price of the items I purchase, I pay them even if I use cash.

As the article outlines, they already do by not allowing you to purchase cryptocurrencies.

I don't see any logical reason why "I'm paying them for a service" means they can't impose restrictions on the service they offer, except in the case of a monopoly, in which case there may have to be regulations on this.

The cryptocurrency decision was driven by higher than normal share of chargebacks. Even if the consumer is wrong, and bank eventually denies a refund on that BTC @ $16,000 purchase, there are processing and overhead costs that impact bank margins.