> Cryptocurrencies, even those that turn out to be highly plutocratic, will not turn any part of the world into anything close to dystopia A

This is only true iff the meme that "crypto is eating the world" is false, i.e. if a future where crypto is more and more enmeshed in an individual's economic life doesn't pan out.

This is possible and maybe even likely, but it is somewhat ironic to hear such a bearish case on crypto's usfeulness made by vbuterin :)

  > First, start with some utility function representing the value of having a certain amount of money. `log(x)` is popular, because it captures the intuitively appealing approximation that doubling one's income is about as useful at any level: going from $10,000 to $20,000 adds the same utility as going from $5,000 to $10,000 or from $40,000 to $80,000).

This is not intuitive to me. Intuitively, going from 10K to 20K is not the same as going from 1M to 2M. In the former case, you cross the USA poverty line[1], in the latter, you can afford a couple more Lambos.

Is there something I'm missing in the use of the word "utility"?

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_threshold#United_State...