[raven105x]

It's not a step backwards, it's a tradeoff. Crypto is a tool, just like a bank is a tool. It has different pros, it has different cons. Personally I greatly enjoy sending any amount to any country without the possibility of a hold or embargo because "MuH TeRrOrIsM, tHiNk Of ThE cHiLdReN and WaR oN DrUgZ" which is in reality just about governments always wanting more power since all three of those are routinely found to be enabled by and participated in by big banks anyways.

At the end of the day, you relinquish control for a false sense of security. Everyone storing their money in banks in Venezuela found this lesson out the hard way: you don't have any money. The government allows you to store and pass around notes for debt, which are commonly agreed upon as valuable and so our economy spins onward. You know what they say about those willing to give up freedom for security.

Realistically, use your head please. Full tradfi and full defi are equally unwise. It's risk management 101. And yes, some very unsavory things going down in any country are always a risk if you are planning a resilient infrastructure for your estate spanning generations. Usually this has taken the form of multinational diversification, but now we have the extra option to secure long-term wealth without all the legal expenses. Don't dismiss it.

A non-material agreed upon medium of value transfer completely outside of control of governments is unprecedented. You can go to any country, and get someone to give you their paper currency, for a digital one you possess - without ANY restrictions or moratoriums. I'm not sure how that can possibly be called a step backwards. It's a valuable tool even if most of HNs audience has no use for it. Control comes with risks and responsibilities. This is true for being your own bank, running your own infrastructure, and everything else. Literally nothing about this tradeoff is new or shocking, except that it's now available for currency as well.