MusaTheRedGuard

Yep. Most smart people, even the most diehard fans, knew tether was at the very least, extremely shady.

Forking is not a problem. It's users voting with their feet.

The possibility of forking is a necessary deterrent in cryptonetwork governance.

If the maintainers of a network become compromised or get coopted by special interests, the collective owners of the network(the holders of the cryptocurrency) have the right to exit.

The right to exit is a necessary part of governance.

> you can only commit to a given supply curve, but you cannot adjust it according to the state of the economy.

Why do you think this? Ethereum has changed its inflation schedule a few times recently.

It seems you are basing this on the hard capped supply model of bitcoin which is not the same as every cryptocurrency.

What do you think decentralized finance even is?

At this point, I find it hard to take mainstream journalist's criticism of bitcoin seriously unless the criticizers agree on what they're criticizing.

Bitcoin isn't exchanges or "crypto" or "blockchain" or ICOs or tokens.

Bitcoin is not an exchange. That's like saying the economy is screwed up because a company went bankrupt.

This entire thread: "Why don't you just use the post office why do you need email?"

Or a jurisdiction which has rules that you can't or choose not to comply with

And I'm saying illegality is not the only usecase, though it is definitely a valuable and useful one.

In case it wasn't clear, the usecases i mentioned above (gambling, getting around capital controls) exist and are live in crypto right now.