[miscreanity]

Each consensus method (Proof-of-Work, Proof-of-Stake, Directed-Acyclic-Graph, etc) has weaknesses that can be exploited by a large or influential enough entity - there are no exceptions. All it takes is time.

By the time the system has reached mass adoption, we will probably come to find that there is a central entity with majority influence over it but the utility and infrastructure integration will have such momentum that changing will be effectively impossible. Fringe communities may be able to operate relatively independently, but the core will be subject to the most dystopian control and tracking system ever devised - Huxley and Orwell could not have imagined worse.

That isn't to say that life won't be improved in general - there will be major positives. However, an undercurrent of entrapment will pervade even if it isn't at the forefront of attention.

[AlexCoventry]

It seems likely that Proof-of-Stake can require an economic commitment which will be extremely hard to expropriate, and can at least start out with a fairly diverse group of validators. If the chain is valuable enough, it's going to be expensive to buy up enough to pervert its consensus, and doing so will result in the stake being slashed.

On the other hand, a currency which people are forced to use by law (legal tender for tax payments) will always have a huge advantage. So if governments decide to move to most transactions in the national currency taking place via cryptographically signed attestations involving government-provided keys, that will be a major move towards the kind of dystopia you're imagining.

[miscreanity]

Proof-of-Stake units don't have to be acquired via public exchange, so ownership can concentrate without visibility; same as any other crypto system. It would likely work well enough for a period of time but as the system starts to show it's age, lots of unpleasantness follows.

I fully expect governments will embrace and utilize crypto to terrifying effect. Maybe it's time for Mars colonization?