"They are doing it too" is a favorite argument of crypto-enthousiasts. I'd argue the answer here is not more madness (crypto), but a serious attempt to fix the traditional financial system.
We basically have low inflation and a savings craze as a driver of a housing bubble in 2008 as people were looking for perfect, risk free bonds (no such thing can exist outside government bonds and even those are just best effort).
The people behind Bitcoin were basically thinking: Ok, our banking system failed because of low inflation and a savings craze. Let's make both of those worse so that it will never become possible to run an economy on top of Bitcoin.
Fiat banking failed because an aging population has a strong saving preference to the point that it chokes out businesses. The idea behind saving is that you release production capacity in the economy so it can be used on something else. The population isn't going to stop aging. The problem is going to get worse over time. There won't be a something else unless the government artificially uses the savings on that something else.
Is TFA specific enough for you? It appears to be about the inevitable outcome of imitating banks in an unregulated context. A top level comment here is about the outcry for regulation that this then produces.
I think the point is that starting over will just create a new equally broken system. So then we'll have two broken systems. Humanity could've instead used all that time/effort/capital to continue improving on traditional finance as we have been doing over the past century.
The current financial system becomes more robust every time a black swan event like 2008 occurs.
Crypto is reinventing the same system as traditional finance and hitting all the same problems that we encountered in the last 100 years.
At least here everybody who opens their eyes can see that it's a house of cards.