If you created a nuclear power plant in your basement that you feel is totally safe, that is great, but a good chunk of the rest of the country wouldn't be comfortable with that and they would expect the government to shut down your nuclear power plant.
You could disagree with them and the government, but it wouldn't work out well for you to invest all your money into your basement nuclear reactor.
You started with claiming it "does not work", but ended with "it's bad investment because the government would destroy you". These are wildly different claims.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_sky_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Securities_and_Exchange_C...
People generally don't want to get scammed, which is why crypto is failing. Obviously we are not talking about the software here. I'm sure plenty of Web3 "software" works just fine, what doesn't work is selling unregulated securities to investors who lose all the money.
You use two distinct definitions of success here. As a means to transfer value beyond governmental control, Bitcoin has succeeded. You can do it any time, provided you are fine with your value stored in Bitcoins.
The other definition is "anybody can use it without the fear of ever being scammed and the regulators can not make using it inconvenient or legally dangerous". This is obviously impossible - the regulators can declare anything they want to be illegal (even the Constitution is only a weak impediment, and it does not have any barriers preventing financial regulation, and as long as people do transactions, they could scam each other. This is absolutely unrealistic and non-sensical definition of "success" - nobody ever could deliver on this, including every existing payment system, where people get absolutely scammed all the time.