[plywoodtrees]

The distinction between "gives people more freedom to conduct their business without state intervention" and "enables crime" seems very elusive.

I can see an argument that enabling crime under oppressive regimes is moral. Or even enabling particular crimes that you feel shouldn't be crimes.

I have trouble seeing the legitimate use case for cryptocurrency in first world countries. If the main use case is crime, money laundering and speculation, it will either be squashed or remain niche.

[drawnwren]

I tend to agree with your assessment, but you are dancing around an important point.

Most people in the world don't live in a first world democracy. Today, many of these countries are stable and providing currency for their citizens. But ask a Venezuelan if they can see a reason why we might want an alternative to a state backed currency and I feel like the answer is self-evident.

Vitalik saw this use case and talked about how disheartened he was by the ICO boom because it was use cases like this that he believed in, so it isn't at all an afterthought.