[gosub100]

The original idea with crypto was that the "code" was so strong, it removed the need for physical banks, tellers, FDIC, law enforcement, etc. The theory was, we can have everything the banking system has, but cheaper, because the only way to steal money was to break the crypto itself, hence "code is law".

The industry cannot appeal to the protections of law enforcement, civil tort, and other features of the regulated banking system, without simultaneously undermining the "crypto" part. If you're going to summon authorities when hackers hack, you're no better off than if you just acted like any other bank and stored the client's balance in an excel sheet.

[bryceneal]

> The original idea with crypto was that the "code" was so strong, it removed the need for physical banks, tellers, FDIC, law enforcement, etc.

Is this really an accurate characterization of "the original idea"? And according to whom?

[packetlost]

The Bitcoin paper pretty heavily alludes to this, though behind the guise of censorship resistant currency, which is exactly the same concern.

I personally know of at least one person who was able to escape Russia at the very beginning of the Ukraine war because cryptocurrency was a viable way for his brother in America to fund his escape despite sanctions and other hurdles.

[gosub100]

Yes it is. Me and many other people.