It gives freedom to people, how is that bad? The whole point is that it's a permissionless, borderless technology that anyone can participate in. There's really nothing holding innovation back.

Flash loans are an example of that innovation, where if you see an arbitrage opportunity in the market, you can profit from it even if you don't own huge capital, so it levels the playing field for all these financial actors.

This seems akin to looking at someone's code and saying "This is crap! We should throw it out and rewrite it from scratch" without understanding how and why it got the way it did.

See Chesterton's Fence: https://fs.blog/2020/03/chestertons-fence/

> It gives freedom to people, how is that bad?

That's just a slogan. The devil is in the details. To use an extreme example: Murder laws removes my freedom to kill random people; how is that good?

That impinges on someone else's freedom. I'd go with something like selling 2 kidneys or contracts that result in indentured servitude.

Everything we do impinges on someone else's freedom. Being legally allowed to walk in the street? Impinges on someone else's freedom to block me from walking in the street.

It is always a tradeoff. In the case of the particular tech discussed, it's a tradeoff between being able to somewhat control crime (e.g, making payment for human trafficking harder, making it possible to reverse theft) and financial privacy. It's freedom from having things stolen and freedom from being regulated.

>It gives freedom to people, how is that bad?

Well it's great in theory until you hit a problem nobody was incentivized to guard against the resulting failure cascades.