The assumption is the more important aspect of Lin's article, however, because the arguments rest so heavily upon it that they are almost offered as self-evident assertions. If you buy the presumption, you've bought the conclusions.

Lin opens with a nod to the "disconcerting image of what regulation might entail," such as "being tracked down [by] the Internal Revenue Service" or being imprisoned for "using crypto in India." Another nod goes to advocates who believe financial freedom is "part of crypto's DNA"—a freedom for which Bitcoin was created. The acknowledgements are cursory and dismissive, however.