Well, yeah. That's why I asked it in order to learn more. I don't keep up with the latest trends in cryptocurrency, for the same reason that I don't keep up with the latest trends in astrology: Because the fundamental concept is so egregiously flawed that anything built on top of it is doomed from the start, and that nothing in any of the investigations I've done over the past decade have changed that conclusion.

But I at least like to know the general terms that are floating around, both in case one of them happens to change my mind on cryptocurrencies, and so that I know what to warn family members away from if they ask.

Could you explain why you think the fundamental concept is egregiously flawed?

All the standard reasons that cryptocurrency fans dismiss as having heard over and over, but I have yet to hear good responses to.

* Proof of Work is unethically wasteful. Proof of Stake is unethically oligarchical.

* Far too wild of price swings to be used as a currency.

* Inventory tracking with blockchain has the same problem as any other inventory tracking system, that it relies on humans putting in truthful information.

* Smart contracts assume that the hard part of a contract is the enforcement, not the meeting of the minds. Having a human as part of the conflict resolution (i.e. the legal system) is necessary.

* Irreversible transactions are a bug, not a feature, and are what drove the rise of ransomware.

* Negative impact on the GPU market for actually productive uses.

Cryptocurrencies are fantastic for money laundering and paying for illegal services, but I don't think those are exactly good reasons to keep them around.

And yet the value keeps going up. I appreciate you people, the constant reminder that so many of you hold these incorrect views really magnifies the sense of "getting in early".

Markets can be irrational, especially when they're unregulated.