In a world where 'literally' can be defined as 'figuratively', I'm not sure why we bother splitting hairs on terminology... what is accepted is what is accepted.
This isn't the world. This is Hacker News, which is full of people who know what crypto is and know what cryptocurrency is and can expect each other to do better than ambiguity.
Is it accepted? I would agree only when it appears in the NYT or The Economist with its 'new' meaning.
It's a subset of lazy people in tech who are abusing 'crypto' at this point in time, not Valley Girls. There's an inflection point here to interdict the abuse, before it gains mass-usage.
What is actually happening is that someone tells other people on the lawn that they wish kids wouldn't walk (and poop) on it, and then some of those other people play kiddo advocate and yell at that person. The kids are aren't providing any active resistance at all compared to that.
And vice versa. Though actually, I can care less than I care about "what the world accepts", for example about some person speaking for the world. If you accept it, make your case; if you don't, leave "the world" out of it.
Anything is "accepted" (by someone, somewhere). That gives us no Information. FWIW, what is rejected is what is rejected, and I reject this abuse of language.
Sorry if I confused anyone, didn’t mean to start a flame war. It was just the first domain I found that was available, I didn’t think too much about it
IMO it's far more misguided. We can push for precise and efficient language, or we can shrug our shoulders and let the lowest common denominator strip out all nuance.