This is just such an awful betrayal of their mission. The Economist should know better, and everyone I have spoken to which is senior in their readership does know better. This is still a pro-crypto-scam article. They repeat the same scam-artist lies, crypto is somehow an innovation in "trust", somehow more "efficient" than existing infrastructure, somehow "smart contracts" are more reliable than actual contracts. Th…
The Economist represents a world viewpoint from the days of the United Kingdom: as in a small island nation with a monarchy exerting centralized economic control over a vast worldwide imperial empire. Why would they like cryptocurrency in any way, unless the Bank of England had monopolistic control over it?
I'm angry that they're repeating pro-cypto ideology. If you read the article, they do not want gov control. They want the scams to play out.
I expect better from the economist. It shares a readership with the FT, and the FT has not fallen victim to this hysteria.