I see problems with a lot of the things this guy says.
> Access to liquidity for early investors. Would you buy stock in a company if the senior management was dumping that stock?
There are lots of cases where an early investor, or early employee, might want liquidity on their holdings. For example, there are many cases of employees being essentially "trapped" at their companies, waiting for an exit.
> Stock is effectively a claim on a company’s dividends and the governance ability to hire/fire management in search of better cashflows. Token holders waive all of their rights.
How many dividends have Facebook, Amazon, Apple, or Alphabet issued exactly? And how many people have common shareholders hired/fired?
> Fundamentally Incompatible with the Legal System [...] Unless courts decided to cede their power (don’t hold your breath!), they will always be able to override the blockchain through blunt means like seizure of bank accounts, physical property and/or arrest of principals involved.
There are lots of tokens where this is the case, and I have to agree that ICOs make no sense for those cases. However, if it's actually a decentralized tokensale (e.g. cryptocurrencies, all DAOs)
> Lack of Basic Investor Protections
I think that, for a lot of (especially early) crytpo people, this is viewed as a strength. While it's unsurprising that a professional investors is going to miss the rules and customs that favour capital over all, there's a pretty big movement of people who were frustrated watching banks devour billions of dollars of taxpayer money in the form of bailouts, who've seen private capital groups walking away with millions from failed investments, and who've seen earnings for capital outpace every other form of income for the past several decades.
> Bitcoin is the world’s first (and best!) censorship-resistant digital store of value, and has amazing potential to improve the world by helping individuals regain their financial sovereignty.
Gee, I wonder if the author owns any bitcoin lol