And from which time traveler did you get this information?
The future is pretty hard to predict accurately, especially in such definitely terms like "never".
For instance, the Russians were cut off SWIFT. If the oligarchs had crypto, they could access their wealth and render sanctions ineffective.
Believe it or not the Ukrainians are in a war, and currency is not their biggest problem - that would be the tanks, and the bombs and the planes. Once the war resolves, so will their access to money. On the other hand, systems designed to evade sanctions are making that process longer and more painful - and more likely to resolve in the aggressors favor, as the Russians are better capitalized. The Russian people need to feel the pain to pressure their government to end the conflict.
Some pain is good, and so is our ability to inflict it.
Wrenches can be used as weapons but they are also essential for plumbers.
I mean I don't defend crypto, the way things are going is that they'll be just as regulated and centralized as digital fiat is, and a lot of it is people getting rich, or hoping to - I mean I'm one of those people, still waiting for my handful of dogecoin to go up 10.000% so I can retire. But I also have a regular job, regular savings, and regular stonks because savings account interest is a joke.
Say you created a business accepting exclusively cryptocurrencies. You need to ship an item? You need “dirty fiat”. Let’s say you’re only selling NFTs or services, your hosting provider wants paid in real currency. Food? Housing? Utilities? Fiat. Fiat. Fiat.
Unless it’s accepted for the entire supply chain of LIFE, you’re screwed.
BitTorrent traffic went down as streaming services increased.
Otherwise, why do you think that these criminals are turning to privacy coins like Monero and MobileCoin, etc?
Let's take bitpay, probably the largest and oldest merchant processing system for crypto transactions. They publish stats. [1]
- 40% of all of their transactions globally are for prepaid gift cards.
- 20% of all of their transactions globally are for "internet."
- 14% of all of their transactions globally are for "vpn."
So 75% of all of their transactions globally are for merchant categories closely associated with fraud. And the reason is obvious: it's slower, more expensive and less convenient than using a credit or debit card. So it self-selects.
Folks who "find a way to make it work" are usually ideological, in crypto (i.e. found other people who don't care that it's impractical or criminal) or have otherwise found ways of "processing crypto transactions" (i.e. using bitpay where the merchants do not receive crypto because of course they don't why would they).
Depends on what they’re supplying. Something locally grown, ok, but overseas labs synthetics can involve a lot of middlemen.
It is what criminals and terrorists are using to make their activities impossible to trace. Got to thank MobileCoin for enabling that.
[0] https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360057625692-In...
I just can’t buy into these arguments that we should be overlooking these rampant frauds and crimes (like the multi-billion fraud in this article and many more like it) because it might hypothetically enable some oppressed people somewhere in the world to escape some government oppression.
In these hypothetical scenarios, are we supposed to believe that the oppressive governments would just look the other way and let people transfer their wealth into crypto exchanges before fleeing? That would defeat the purpose of the government restrictions, so obviously not. Or are we supposed to believe that they moved all of their wealth into crypto and took it out of exchanges and into private wallets before the oppression? The crypto maximalists would love that because it would drive up crypto prices, but it’s not practical in a world where most people have their weath in assets like houses, cars, and diversified investments.
The Fifth Amendment is invoked far more often by actual criminals to hide their crimes than people avoiding government oppression. Doesn’t mean the Fifth should be abolished.
Are we supposed to believe that crypto is magically cleaned when the oppressive government seizes it and uses it or resells it? for all purposes right now, thats true and no transaction flagging software is advanced enough to consider that yet.
Woah woah that crypto came out of a mixer at some point in time!!! Thats used for “bad” crimes orders of magnitude more than “good crimes”, I think….
Oh nevermind, this passed through one of the seoveriegn washer addresses later, all good!”
If you are for bitcoin and its 'benefits' and you are not someone who is doing tax fraud in a big way, you do not benefit from crypto, you are loosing.
Unreported income is tax money which is missing for schools, infrastructure and co.
It might not be used always efficency but it benefits you more than not having it. It should also be a much higher motivation for everyone of us to stop tax fraud all together instead of complaining about taxes and trying to avoid taxes.
Why? Please don't just make unfounded assertions.
Americans and Europeans have very limited experience with hyperinflation and volatile currencies, plus we have robust banking/fin-tech sectors so of course we're more prone to scoff at the problems cryptos will solve.
[0] https://www.yahoo.com/video/7-biggest-bitcoin-crashes-histor...
Both are on Ethereum and if you keep wealth in them that wealth cannot be confiscated or censored (except with a physical wrench attack).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Single_Market#Capital
by the way just a heads up I suggest you learn the value of basic human kindness in your manner.
You are part of a system like a country. You are part of that country and the country acts on your behalf.
IF there is a good reason that the state only allows sending money after certain criteria are met, its for the good of the country (normal countries, not corrupt ones).
Then the country and its laws has the right to reduce that freedom.
You might believe in the republic idea of everyone for him/herself but studies also show that for normal earning people, this is not helping them at all.
Its not a global basic right to 'deserve a way to send money without middleman'. I'm not even allowed to just move to another country. I'm in one way or another imprisoned in my birth country.
And it's not always about govs.
You may be imprisoned. but dont imprison others with your assumptions
I'm totally lost on what you are trying to imply with "And please show me where rights are granted to governments and by who and for what basic purpose."
You are fully aware that there are countries. You should know how they work, you should know what models of representation exists and which forms of gov you are in.
Give yourself the illusion that you are independent while paying taxes and putting on your seatbelt.
How is it irrelevant? The ban in China did not affect the operation of the network.
With regard to the "move", this is plagued by the same flaw the energy consumption statistics are: you don't know where the miners are. Not acknowledging this limitation is somewhere between disingenuous and stating a falsehood.
This does not demonstrate that developed nations "could shut it down tomorrow".
I’m not sure it’s true that nobody knows where they are. There are rankings by country. They need Internet access and power. Many operate openly. Large data centers aren’t invisible.
Also, miners were kicked out of Kyrgyzstan. Many machines were confiscated. It seems a lot of miners moved to the US because, even if they are eventually shut down, at least they will still have their machines, hopefully.
Governments could greatly reduce the hash rate by cracking down on miners who operate openly, and then Bitcoin would be considerably less secure against a takeover.
Suppose, after getting kicked out of many places, many miners move somewhere without strong property rights, and then the government takes control of the machines and runs them? Or maybe the miners keep running, but the government tells them which transactions to block?
Only the corrupt ones might accept a bribe.
I hope not.
A more meaningful move would be to ban exchanges, so that miners can no longer take exit liquidity at the expense on retail "investors".
[1] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/mp-mark-stra...
[2] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-rcmp-banks-an...
[3] https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/2022/02/23/justin-t...
The article didn't say it didn't happen. In fact, it says it did happen:
“individuals and companies suspected of involvement in illegal acts,” such as “influencers in the illegal protest in Ottawa””
What exactly does it mean to be an "influencer"? Why are people being punished for "suspected involvement"? You're using circular reasoning claiming the only people affected deserved it.
>Last, the government ceded its emergency powers after about a week total
What does this matter if they can turn around and re-enact it tomorrow?
I am not using circular reasoning; I am literally addressing the fact that donating $50 to the convoy did not subject you to your bank account being frozen, despite purported claims to the contrary.
The “illegal acts” are referring to the plain-as-day laws that the protesters (to some, occupiers) were accused of breaking, like parking tractor trailers in the middle of the street for weeks blocking traffic in downtown Ottawa.
If folks outside the immediate circle of downtown protesters and organizers were affected, I would find that deeply concerning. But I can only find unsubstantiated rumors. If you have a credible source indicating otherwise, I’d appreciate it.
They have to listen to laws.
Guess what happens if crypto would become bigger and actually a problem for all states globally?
Do you really think they will just accept this? In which way do you think they literlay can't control crypto anymore?
Just because its digital and on the internet, doesn't mean its digital only. It is not and as long as that is, its easy for a state to make sure crypto will never ever reach this level.
You don't believe a state can do this? Just a small reminder about the great firewall from china. There are countries who shut down their internet, literaly.
Also accounts were still seized over a protest, so it doesn't matter if it was from people donating or those who were protesting
https://financialpost.com/fp-finance/banking/convoy-leader-d...
(Url is weird and doesn't match the actual article)
> Trudeau had said earlier he wanted to extend them past the 30 days.
Can you provide a source because I can’t find anything backing this claim.
If they don't know it exists, they can't take it. Just like I can cross the border with a hundred thousand in crypto in a wallet. And even if they find the hardware wallet, that is not enough to seize the funds, especially if it's a brain wallet or something similar. The same simply doesn't exist for fiat.
No, you can't. You can cross the border with the private key for a wallet containing the addresses of a hundred thousand units of crypto, but the crypto isn't in your wallet (either kind), it's in the blockchain ledger of whatever cryptocurrency you're using.
And this is an important distinction from money, because the money is actually in your wallet and you can use it without an internet connection, but the crypto is actually in the cloud and requires an internet connection to access and use.
I've said this before: any financial system that turns a presumed crime (the efficient cause of the asset seizure) into direct evidence of another crime (trying to hide assets) is not a good financial system.
What you're describing doesn't exist in practice for any medium of exchange.
Do you think a cryptocurrency is any less susceptible to civil forfeiture than cash?
(I am not here to make any value judgments)
I think this hinges on what problem you identify. If someone identifies centralized financial systems as bad, even if they're efficient, the problem is real and the solution fits the problem. If you contest this, as many do for good reason, it becomes a solution in search of a problem.
Investors in the next 10 years are going to realise that an omnipool was all that was needed in the first place and the NYSE is a dinosaur in comparison.
Guess what our current fiat system actually is? A highly finetuned evolutionary PoS system.
It has features like:
- transparency
- fraud detection
- political sanctions (russia vs. ukraine, north korea, iran...)
- fairness due to transparency (you pay your taxes, i do: we both pay our fair share of infrastrucutre cost etc.)
- easy to use (my grandparenst were able to use it)
- save
- easy authentication and authorization system (i can get money with my passport)
- globally accepted
- low transaction fees
- self optimizing system due to capital market (one bank can do transactions faster and cheaper than you can)
99% of the world can't, either because of where they live, or the government deciding they're not allowed to because they're not rich enough to join the elites.
This is the world Ethereum unlocks - a global financial system that allows anyone to participate regardless of where they were born or their background.
If you value freedom you'll see it's a far superior financial system than the one we have today.
It's not technically ready yet, but the path is clear and it will be there sooner than you think.
But let me tell you what the PoS part is in our current fiat system:
I get my salary in fiat. I save my fiat in a bank account for being used later. I might not need to hold 1tb of ram available and proof that i have it running, but i already proof that i trust my fiat because i get my salary in it. I pay with it, i save it.
I have a high stake in it. I also have systems/tools available to me for my fiat like banks and laws.
This is no different to what etherium proposes: For PoS you need to buy and hold etherium and you get etherium for doing so.
It is not some saving mechanism, it is a concensus mechanism. It ensures fraud doesn't occur and that more crypto isn't being created out of thin air. It is a way to incentivice node operators to act fairly.
If the USD had a POS system, I would 100% have all my money in it. but i can't verify the whims of the FED
- fraud detection
See point above, fraud is built into the system.
- political sanctions (russia vs. ukraine, north korea, iran...)
Political sanctions have been this economic philosophy that hasn't entirely played out in the countries doing the sanctions favor. These economies, due to force have been required to be much more verticly integrated and invest into the economies most hit by sanctions. Sanctions don't do much and the problem is, the more you sanction the less leverage you have.
- fairness due to transparency (you pay your taxes, i do: we both pay our fair share of infrastrucutre cost etc.)
What is fair about the current tax system? See my transparency point above, all those people trying to evade crypto taxs are in for a rude awakening when the governmeent develops machine learning to track and trade public ledgers... Everyone knows it's a public ledger... exactly the oposite of being descrete.
- easy to use (my grandparenst were able to use it)
Becausee it started being built when your grandparents grandparents were alive. Most shops didn't accept CC's when they first came out and it took a generation for the technology to preliforate. I'd say crypto has done what the old system did in 1/4 of the time.
- save
I get 4% APR on my stablecoins. 20+% on my DeFi Pools paid in stable coins.
- easy authentication and authorization system (i can get money with my passport)
I can provide authorization with a 10 word pneumonic.
- globally accepted
What is globally accepted exactly? USD? no it's not... it's only acceepted in the US. If i want to do business globally i have to swap to that asset. I not only have to worry about remittance, currency exchanges, trade fees and loan denomination. Terra has the ability to swap between many different currencies using stablecoins with almost no transaction fees.
- low transaction fees
BTC and Eth have extremely high transaction fees, but any V3 crypto has lower transaction fees than the current financial system. - self optimizing system due to capital market (one bank can do transactions faster and cheaper than you can)
self optimizing system due to capital market (one bank can do transactions faster and cheaper than you can)
Play around with some decentralized exchanges, solona or DOT. they can do transactions faster and cheaper than any incumbent, including VISA or the NYSE.
- Crypto is not transparent. Its continuously mentioned as a benefit of crypto. You should be fully aware of all the methods crypto provides to be intransparent. Tumblers, Lightning network or when you go away from bitcoin, monero is inherent intransparent.
- You might ignore the Efficiency of political sanctions, but the struggles for those people are real. I have been to Iran and have seen it by my own eyes.
- Crypto is still not easy to use. Stop lying to yourself. Go to el salvador and look how they use it. There is only one small city able to use the lightning network properly. The rest of the country doesn't know how to handle it properly. They also have fraud as most of them never got their crypto which was promised to them.
- " 20+% on my DeFi Pools" you should understand better what you are actually doing. You do high risk, low sanctioned, under the radar gambling. Stop comparing 20% of some shitty gambling/ponzi schema to anything real life
- "I can provide authorization with a 10 word pneumonic." wow. I forgot my 4 digit pin a few times in the last 10 years. I literally lost my company password and the muscle mnemonic for half a day. I literally can't lose my passport. My country will make a new one for me. Try to rememeber your 10 words when you are 70. Try to make sure that you do not enter your 10 words in a system which can transparently steal your money as soon as you tell it your 10 words.
Have you ever spend the amount of time you spend on learning about crypto to learn about fiat?
It seems like it precisely solved the problem it originally claimed to solve to me. Permissionless p2p transactions. Full stop, no political baggage to argue about.
I think it's others look for "bigger" problems for it to fill that are the problem, not the tech itself.
Blockchain's killer app is Bitcoin. Someday folks will finally realize this.
Many will think it's useless until they unfortunately find a need for it.
It's hard to overstate how valuable that is for anyone who finds themselves in that position, and it's becoming more relevant by the day.
You can also only do this as long as crypto is so small that its not getting banned.
And for everyone who doesn't has this issue, crypto is actually bad: the overall benefit of anonymous money transfer benefits who want to do illegal things which are illegal for purposes.
Would you like to know that others are doing tax fraud and you are the fair citizen? Knowing that they do not contribute to schools and infrastructure while using your schools and infrastructure?
We do not benefit from tax fraud. The mafia does.
>You can also only do this as long as crypto is so small that its not getting banned.
Killing cryptocurrency is impossible if people value it and can exchange it for fiat in-person.
>And for everyone who doesn't has this issue, crypto is actually bad: the overall benefit of anonymous money transfer benefits who want to do illegal things which are illegal for purposes.
Governments can make anything illegal for any reason they want. I've lost a ton of trust in the Canadian government after they deemed it illegal to donate to a cause they disagree with.
>Would you like to know that others are doing tax fraud and you are the fair citizen? Knowing that they do not contribute to schools and infrastructure while using your schools and infrastructure?
>We do not benefit from tax fraud. The mafia does.
The mafia has far better ways of committing tax fraud than using cryptocurrency.
Only the rich will benefit from banning cryptocurrency.
People stop valueing it when they can't do anything with it. Currently no one cares about crypto for anything besides gambling. There is a very long way ahead for any crypto to become anything else.
". I've lost a ton of trust in the Canadian government after they deemed it illegal to donate to a cause they disagree with." You are still in a democracy. Feel free to move to russia if you prefer a dictatorship. but otherwise its your responsibility to accept democratic decisions you don't like or you don't understand.
I'm not saying its always fair or that democracy/canada is the best thing in the world but for you as an individual, with the current options that actually is the best case for you.
"Only the rich will benefit from banning cryptocurrency." the rich don't care. They benefit from everything which makes money.
Kearney, NE seems like a popular destination too, for crypto mining.
https://www.npr.org/2022/02/24/1081252187/bitcoin-cryptocurr...
the problem = lack of investment options, stagnant wages, inflating cost of living, being priced out
solution = gambling on crypto and making some money
speaking as a millenial. honestly crypto is the only way could ever dream of buying a house.
ive been working 15 years and saved 150k. average family home in my town is over 1 million.
and stocks are inflated, the s&p is almost at a 90 degree angle. i bought btc in 2014 and my only regret was not buying more.
The S&P500 will always look like a 90 degree angle on a long enough timeline, that's just how exponentials work. And it is by definition exponential as earnings compound, a quality cryptos do not possess. But it is ironic to hold that against it when 5-year charts in the crypto world look as they do.
Time will tell which way it resolves I guess.
i mean something changed in the stock market after 2008. i'm not really educated enough in finance, but it seems the value of stocks just went vertical. and since the covid pandemic everything has doubled in value. i know its related to decrease in value of usd but since my salary doesnt even increase to match inflation so its the same both ways.
if i invest in stocks, at best i will get 2x after 5 years, at worst i will be buying at the peak of the everything bubble.
No one rational would argue there is no opportunity there, there's tremendous trading opportunity in any market and it only goes up (as well as the risk) the more volatile and unregulated it is. There's also tremendous opportunity to make money in the Turkish market, Russian ones these days I bet will mint millionaires. That doesn't say anything regarding if it's a good idea or not to partake, let alone to buy, pray and hodl.
>that is what most retail are buying.
That kills your opportunity, going to the crowded asset isn't exactly good for you, it just increases your cost basis and reduces your earnings or dividend yield (not that you get one with most cryptos). It's good if you're trading and have an edge in that game tho, but that's not what people I know do when they buy crypto for the long haul or gamble for the short term.
>if i invest in stocks, at best i will get 2x after 5 years, at worst i will be buying at the peak of the everything bubble
That seems to be the general theme. Pessimistic outlook on the best case for stock with an optimistic outlook for the best case in crypto while ignoring it's worst case. Also while ignoring the monumental amount of fraud and open scheming in crypto (CC: all the influencers and their literally worthless NFTs, the rugs, the thefts, the bot-phishing), doesn't exactly scream "rational, not a bubble market".
Why not realistically looking about the worst case for both rather than focus on the best case for one? For crypto it's possibly getting offramps rugged by governments or even simply the market changing it's mind - with no intrinsic value there's basically no floor. In both cases you get wiped entirely. For stocks there'll always be a floor as they represent stakes in the actual economy, real companies with real balance and earnings sheet. Worst case historically is a -90%, but that went with the great depression and famine, you'll have bigger worries. A 2008 style historic crisis is a mere -50%.
I think owning crypto makes sense, but I can't understand the rationale behind being all-in crypto with significant life savings which I see a lot. If it's really gonna overtake the entire fiat system, you'll be just fine even without risking to lose everything you own in the even it's a dud and doesn't overtake the financial system.
I'd add, if your revenue figure is right, 12B profit (let's be generous) isn't exactly something to drool about on a 250B base. A 5% yield is of course fine if sustainable, arguably high end (in line with sectors like oil, but below sin sectors and specific stocks), but I'd bet 5% is not the sort of returns the crypto crowd is aiming for, not even close. There are safer ways to earn 5%.
People don't understand crypto yet... play around with it a bit.
Things not possible in the current financial system:
- Participate in a crowdlown on polkadot.
- Play around in some DeFi. Earn yield on two assets.
- Store some files hyperlocally and encrypted on peoples laptop with filecoin. And learn how persistant indexing will help the internet be more resiliant.
- Sell some data using ZKsnarks.
- Query the blockchains persistance with the graph.
And if you don't do any of the above and you still hate crypto, just do this for your future self.
- Write a smart contract that sends some coins back to your wallet in 10 years.
If you're correct in your opinion, you get to make fun of all your friends who spent a percentage of their portfolio in the crypto space. And joke about how they should have cashed out in 2020.
But if you're wrong, you have missed the technological innovation of your generation and the potential to shake up the class system.
0.01% of bitcoin holders controls 27% of the currency in circulation. [0]
If this is changing the class system in any way, it's for the worse.
[0] https://www.wsj.com/articles/bitcoins-one-percent-controls-l...
The rothchilds keep their wealth in art, land and gold and why they have managed to stay rich for so long.
I can point to atleast one person who's class shifted and that person is me.
Also, you cherry picked one point among many and misunderstood it. Although there may be some of the financial elite who bought in early in BTC and crypto (Especially A-Z) there was alot of nerdy technologists among the winners. Also, alot of those winners have gone to set up hundreds of crypto companies who might even be more centralized.
Anti-centralization isn't the point i was making, it was a redistribution of that centralization which obviously can never be supported with hard facts but rather a feeling and subjective experience i've had with crypto billionaires.
I suspect you're having a hard time getting people to sympathize and are receiving a lot of pushback because that is an incredibly selfish view that makes people dislike what you're proposing.
Edit: Also, your WSj article is bullshit. I believed you, but that analysis is a bold faced lie and cherry picks alot of facts to arrive at the analysis. OFC all the exchanges are going to appear to have alot of btc and since they are "Actively" trading it, that's the only accounts showing up on the analysis. Most of the BTC owners are maxi's - they don't move or use their BTC. Look at a real wallet distrobution and exclude sitoshi's old wallets cause everyone is pretty sure those are lost to the world. BTC distro is ALOT more decentralized than the USD.
Truth. And I have not idea why people think Crypto is a hedge against anything. It pretty much follows the stock market and gold, albeit in much higher gamma.
If anything, countries might want to ban mining due to its environmental impacts, but as you illustrated, there are plenty of countries for mining operations to move over to, resulting in a game of cat-and-mouse that at its very most impactful might help catalyze the move from Proof of Work cryptos to Proof of Stake cryptos. I just don't see any future where all crypto is largely banned.
Where is this threat of legal action I'm not seeing?
Just buy some and stop being a hater. It's not early anymore.
So why this and not anything else? What's so special about Bitcoin anyways, other than the fact that some HN commenters seem to have some heavy bags that need offloading
Other point is that a lot of these folks dislike what cryptocurrencies are used for like decentralization, censorship-resistance, financial privacy etc
Then there are those who are still butthurt that they did not buy Bitcoin when it was $100.
https://medium.com/humanizing-the-singularity/can-the-world-...
Smart contracts are the best shot we have of doing carbon, methane etc. tracking, managing offsetting payments and everything else required to start getting a grip on the CO2 emissions of the consumer economy.
The obvious problem is that crypto is hugely energy inefficient. Bitcoin in particular consumes a ton of energy with PoW (proof-of-work aka proof-of-waste). Defenders will then point to PoS (proof-of-stake) but that creates a different set of problems (eg the computing power for PoW is part of what keeps the network robust whereas PoS is more like a democracy where you get one vote for every $1 you have).
Carbon trading is never going to happen. It's an idea that's been around for at least 30 years. The only people who are interested in it are those who are invested in it. The only thing that will reduce carbon emissions is the alternatives being cheaper. That's it. Absolutely no one is going to even mildly inconvenience themselves otherwise.
And again, any such ideas suffer from the same problem all crypto does: interfacing with the real world. Like how do you agree on the value of something releasing (or potentially sequestering) carbon (or methane or whatever)? It's up for debate. How do you make sure what someone emits is what they claimed to have?
It's a bit like the ivory traders of Hong Kong who magically have never run out of ivory even though the trade was banned and they're only meant to sell existing stocks.
Less like this and more of how a company is run in real life. Investor, founder, codebase contributor and early coin buyers have alot of the say in the network... Which actually is exactly how it should be. If you were involved in the creation of the network, you should have a say in it's path forward... So am i missing something or does POS completely invalidate your arguments?
>And again, any such ideas suffer from the same problem all crypto does interfacing with the real world. Like how do you agree on the value of something releasing (or potentially sequestering) carbon (or methane or whatever)? It's up for debate. How do you make sure what someone emits is what they claimed to have?
Same way we do it now... Outside validation. The only thing it would do is make it more resistant to fraud is you can have multiple oracles in an open contract that eveeryone will cry foul over if it. Additionally, some of those oracles can be IOT objects controlling and reporting emissions.
These are all solved problems that you are bringing up, the only thing new here is that smart contracts would allow a number of novel things to be done with carbon credits like swapping them for various assets, more controlled reporting with a fixed standard, greater visibility across the supply chain, etc. etc.
I get he didn't explain himself, but there are smart contracts on !Ink which is POS and eth is trying to transition to POS if they can convince individuals to bet on the concensus change.
Apart from the obvious issues (eg energy expenditure) the one myth that needs to die about crypto is that it is extragovernmental and indictments such as this and the Bitfinex laundering case recently should underline that.
The simple fact is that the developed world could shut down what little utility cryptocurrencies (and NFTs) have tomorrow if they chose to. China banned mining and mining was gone immediately (largely moving to Kyrgystan it seems). Defenders will say you can't shut down the network and that might be true but it's irrelevant.
The threat of legal action will be enough to keep th evast majority of people away. And the weakness of any crypto is that at some point it has to interface with the real world or it's completely useless. Obvious example: the traditional financial system. Access to the US financial system is what allows the US government to exercise influence over European financial institutions to stop them, for example, dealing with sanctioned countries like Iran.