No one ever said it was dead.

Its highly likely to experience several more boom and bust cycles. But will it eliminate centralised control of money and power and lead to financial and social utopia? No. Absolutely not.

Further, the very fact in can be manipulated so easily is yet another argument against it becoming mainstream. Yada yada corruption, existing system, bankers, elites whatever. It’s the price you pay for a stable system that works. Not one that doesn’t. It’s sort of like pure socialism, or even communism. It kind of sounds interesting but in practice it’s a complete nightmare. Injustice, corruption and power are required components of a stable system. It really doesn’t matter what path you go down, they’ll always rise to the surface.

No seriously is that not a very simple explanation.
How can it be different.
It's ok posting all your links and how great crypto is but it seems to me to just be a protest vote.
How will crypto be better.
It seems like the envy of the poorer.
All I read is how we are being robbed and how it shouldn't be etc etc.
How on earth can it change.
There is a hierarchy in all of life.
Including finance.
Correct what I've said and why your way will be so much better.
If you reduce the amount of markets like when the euro came to Europe then you reduce competition to retaliate against currency.
Crypto is a single currency.
This cannot be good unless you get in early and control it exactly as the banks are now.

Maybe with bitcoin people on both sides of the argument kind of have a point. As with anything though, if you're in and out at the right time, you'll likely do well out of it. And if you're not, you won't. Aside from that the blockchain technology appears to be the most intriguing aspect. Well that and I suppose an 'off the grid' aspect to it when compared to other types of spending. I can see value in that for people.

I don't like anyone who wishes to have power over others.

There's little point attempting to have reasoned debate with an ideologue, although it's hard not to try.

There is literally nothing you could ever say to make them admit that even the smallest component of what he believes (note belief) is perhaps not as he thought it was.

Much like most people that believe in a god. I respect their right to their beliefs but draw the line when they start to preach them to others packaged up as the only and unanswerable truth. There is only one god, and that's science, until that's proven otherwise. And when it is, I'll happily change my position.