This has some interesting perspectives. I wish it covered more of the reasons a range of people consider cryptocurrencies a horrible product.

Two issues I would like the authors to address:

1) It is erroneous to apply Metcalf’s law to Bitcoin or most cryptocurrency networks. Larger networks have value because as the number of participants grows, it becomes more likely one will be able to use it to interact (pay, communicate, find) a desired peer. In the case of Bitcoin and cryptocurrency, the network does not provide added value. Crypto is more inefficient for payments, so you don’t get value from the likelihood that a counterparty will be on the network. The only potential value is political power to bring in new buyers, just like in a massive pyramid scheme.

2) I think people need to investigate the role of misinformation and deception in promoting cryptoassets. I’ll give one of many examples from the CFA Institutes recent “Crypto Assets” Publication. To argue crypto is an efficient cross-border transfer mechanism, they claim a particular $1+B Bitcoin transfer cost $.68 compared with a “1-8%” cost of fiat transactions

This claim is riddled with errors. 1) The Bitcoin transaction wasn’t even cross border, it was from one account to another at the same exchange. 2) They only account for a portion of the cost paid out of the transaction. They don’t even count the block reward paid to miners or the costs involved outside of the blockchain. 3) They greatly overstate the costs of fiat transactions. Zelle is free to retail customers and costs banks $0.50-$0.75.

I have watched such gaslighting being used to sell Bitcoin since 2013.