Paradise lost? How crypto failed to deliver on its promises - Can we refute these arguments? [SERIOUS]

Following the interesting discussion yesterday in the topic about the % of people who want regulation in crypto, I went looking for other interesting studies and sources on regulation today.

One publication that quickly caught my eye was this one from the European Central Bank from June 2023. Of course, the fact that it comes from the ECB is already a thick warning that it will be firmly anti crypto colored.

(https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/key/date/2023/html/ecb.sp230623_1~80751450e6.en.html)

But I still wonder if we as a community here can refute his arguments in an informed way? Is he making mistakes in his article here and is this man completely crazy? Can we defend crypto from the evil?

I chose the tag serious because I like to have the discussion in a thoughtful way, and not just 'banks bad, crypto good'.

Pls read the publication before responding.

Some statements (there are many more in the publication)

They have become speculative assets[8], as well as a means of circumventing capital controls, sanctions or financial regulation.

​

A key reason why cryptos have failed to make good on their claim to perform the role of money is technical. Indeed, the use of blockchain – particularly in the form of public, permissionless blockchain – for transacting crypto-assets has exhibited significant limitations.[9]

​

Such high volatility also means that households cannot rely on crypto-assets as a store of value to smooth their consumption over time. Similarly, firms cannot rely on crypto-assets as a unit of account for the calculation of prices or for their balance sheet.

​

The crypto industry is seeking to grow by parasitising the financial system

​