This appears to be a sweeping statement that would be very hard to confirm or deny.

The burden of proof is on who makes the initial claim, in this case, the seller. In traditional markets the state forces pharma companies to prove their claims, but in the dark web it's the wild west. Great way to scam people.

You're talking about programming control, I'm taking about macroeconomic control. Switching to crypto removes many of the levers of macroeconomic control, or it shifts the control over to exchanges, mediators (courts), miners, validators, whales, and - probably not what crypto boosters want to hear - governments, who remain the power brokers and can easily assume these roles. Moreover, if crypto boosters think banks won't use their enormous capital, power and overall economics expertise to shift into one of these roles, they're delusional. I feel like crypto boosters think that banks just "don't get it", and this is ludicrous...banks have hundreds of years of institutional economic knowledge and experience. Economics doesn't just get invalidated by crypto.

All of this ignores the fact that crypto is highly susceptible to volatility and scamming overall. Crypto has a larger more complex attack surface at the application layer, and this makes it substantially more risky particularly as malicious technology advances in that domain and can quickly outpace the technology required to secure against it.