"Our currency is immutable and all, no banks or any law messing with your money"
"oh, but that contract that people got conned by need to be fixed, let's throw all promises into the trash and undo that"
"...so you just acted as bank or regulators would, because the Important People lost some money"
"essentially yeah"
Potentially far, far less than a majority of the community, even, considering it's not one person, one vote.
Which I guess is a cricitism of crypto in general - if it were to be adopted widely, the rich can gang up any time on the rest of us and do an 50% vote to rewrite the votes - right now the 1% owns about 30% of wealth in the US - not a stretch to see it go to 50%
The fact that they haven't, or that there aren't even headwinds for such a thing implies that they are more-or-less fine with it.
You’re also misusing “headwinds”.
Even in US, how easy would it be to change zoning regulation to promote more housing.
And it's WORSE, because there is no one person one vote, the amount of money have is directly proportional to the "voting power" in crypto currency.
Bitcoin also made an irregular change, a year and a half into its history.
Listen, this is all code running on computers. At the end of the day everyone could choose to shut it down or replace it entirely and they criticism would still be: See not immutable! Eventually entropy makes everything mutable.
The difference with the bank/regulators is you can't really decide, contrary to Ethereum.
The comparison doesn't hold.
The cryptobros just want to re-invent an alternate world of finance where they are the wealthy oligarchs.
Most people don't want to though, because it doesn't make sense for them : agreeing with "the rich people" don't make you wrong.