IMO we should be throwing sand in the gears of the government. Starting wars and killing hundreds of thousands of people is much worse than ransomware attacks.
If this is a path to applying more regulatory pressure on crypto, by all means, full steam ahead.
Government could eliminate the some of the needs for cryptocurrencies by removing regulatory barriers to transact.
As an example, compliance costs prohibit PayPal from efficiently processing 25 cent arcade or in game transactions.
>Instead of the standard 2.90% + 30p per transaction that PayPal charges, you’ll be charged a 5% + £0.05 fee on every transaction. This would mean that on a £1 transaction, you will pay 10p as transaction fees, rather than 59p, and you save 41p. Ordinarily, this does not look much, but if you sell very high volumes at low prices, it quickly adds up to become a significant saving. After all, it’s a small leak that sinks great ships.
Additionally, for electronic goods most processors require the merchant to offer a no questions asked refund policy.
IMHO, that describes maybe a tenth (maybe) of crypto buyers. Everyone else is just speculating on volatile new assets that are gaining value rapidly.
That is almost the last thing people want.
https://mises.org/wire/why-wild-swings-crypto-prices-are-not...
>Weston Nakamura in an interview with Real Vision’s Jack Farley made the trenchant point, “This is what markets look like when you don't have global central banks artificially suppressing volatility, intervention of central banks buying every dip, putting a safety net under every single slight tremor or taper tantrum or whatever it may be, this is what happens.”
>He explains, “Bitcoin is not a US asset, just like oil is not a US asset, just like gold is not a US asset. Now, those are denominated in USD.” Sure, Americans think in US dollars, but “it's BTC/fiat, and it's not an American asset. People need to get that in their head. If you actually look at BTC/JPY (Japanese yen), the levels make a hell of a lot more sense.”