> 1) I know it's scary, but living with personal responsibility can be a thing that some people actually want.
Right, so it's the OP's fault if you get your wallet randomly drained by hackers and you admit that once a bad actor drains your funds you cannot retrieve them again. This is really helpful for the OP.
> 2) We're extremely early into the invention of cryptocurrencies. Bitcoin is only about 14 years old.
It is not early days at all. Repeating this meaningless cultish incantation doesn't mean or do anything. There are other payment systems that I have mentioned that are proven to be WAY better than crypto.
To be on topic to help the OP, all your arguments have further convinced me that crypto is absolutely NOT the answer to help this person should a situation like this happen.
I don't think anybody would want to use a system that has no fraud control, isn't regulated and doesn't protect their funds.
It seems to me you feel that we need to waste almost 12BN in crypto scams, rugpulls and ransomware just to build the future of finance without need for the state.
Have you stopped to consider that what crypto might be building is, a much much MUCH worse system that what is currently marketed towards victims?
> Why would you need to block exchanges if nobody wants to use it in the real world?
As I said before, the only use case in all of this is price speculation and the exchanges facilitate this and also harbour the selling of illegal securities. There is no other legitimate use case.
And after FTX, there is no convincing anyone anymore and you're completely losing a very very uphill battle and resorting to fanciful, loony pie-in-the-sky libertarian arguments.
It's more of a case of current system already uses fiat and it works better than what crypto is trying to replace.