which changes nothing about the user experience where some massive fraud decades ago resulted in an extra paragraph in the 30 pages of disclaimers and some regulator smugly sitting at their corner desk thinking "ah, in this moment, I am euphoric, consumers are protected"
They think that they flaws of the incumbent system justify any flaws in the new one, without realizing the burden is on them to prove the new system doesn't posses _all_ of the problems (and more) of the original.
I think "whataboutism" describes the situation well. See it a lot with the crypto crowd. Clearly a lot of cognitive dissonance going on there.
if "they" is referring to "me", I don't feel that the new one doesn't inherit or replicate other incumbent system problems. I like that its easy to try out, compared to attempting to try in the incumbent systems. for better, or for worse. its up to the all users to be just as discerning and pragmatic about participating or not. its great that many users are pragmatic supporters that accept things can go wrong and that they become a case study. less discerning users should also be like that, or not participate at all.
cool well unfortunately you're not in charge, a bunch of venture capitalists are. It's great to appeal to ideals but the reality of the situation is that people who don't possess the skills to judge this for themselves are being told to buy in by Matt Damon.
