As we've seen with the development of centralised exchanges, institutional and retail custodial solutions, many of which are backed by various forms of insurance, the fact that the base layer provides for transactional finality (along with many other things), in no way prevents the development of custodial and insurance-backed solutions on top of it.

That crypto can do new things, and yet may also facilitate all of the (useful) old things, simply makes it a superior tool. There can be no fundamental argument against this.

With the big difference that you can evaluate transactions on current cards and halt future ones preventing damage. If you lose a wallet key, you lose all of it. The insurance solution for that would be extremely high compared to the current network.

Sure but it's trivial to split funds across accounts to mitigate that (even dynamically), unlike with cards where getting/activating a new one is a major hassle.

In theory yes. In practice: 1. those keys will be accessible from the same place/machine 2. people won't do it correctly or will ignore the issue. (if developers can't reliably manage PGP keys, general population balancing multiple wallets is just not happening)

Yes, these are concerns, but anything like this will not ultimately be left to consumers to deal with. As part of the process of crypto becoming widely-adopted, this class of problems is in the process of being solved in ways that are transparent to the user, and that will continue. The fact we are still speaking in terms of the base layer at all in terms of many projects, reveals the stage of development we are at.

It's a bit like worrying about how internet users will deal with IP packets that don't arrive, in the context of thinking about about how smooth an experience they're going to have surfing the web. It's not, and won't be, their problem to deal with.

The fact adoption has rushed ahead such that many multi-millions of users are faced with the base layer is analogous to if millions had rushed into using the internet when it was command-line only. Sure, if that had happened, many people would make mistakes and delete their drives or whatever - and this illustrates how wanted and overdue crypto is.

There are tremendous consequences of using this tech at the base layer incorrectly, but it doesn't appear to be dissuading adoption.