[bl557]

The article kind of lost me at times, but on the high level topic of (US) government regulation as an existential threat to crypto:

- The US government is very slow moving, and crypto is quickly gaining popularity amongst the voting public and institutional investors (with access to lobbyists). Once the gov't realizes that crypto is a threat and is able to position itself to form legislation, actually passing the legislation would piss off a lot of groups that the gov't is incentivized to make happy.

- Crypto is technological progress, and banning it would push innovation out of the US and into countries that decide not to regulate

- Banning crypto is an authoritarian act, and is basically an admission by the gov't that it prioritizes tight gripped control over our liberties (not that this point is actually all that unlikely...)

I'm biased, but Occam's Razor applied to the above points makes me feel like the banning of crypto is unlikely... Am I missing something?