The first thing that you have to note about this piece is the following:
Andrew Gillick “Writing macro-investment research with crypto market data provider BNC”.

You can then simply discard everything the writer says, since his purpose in writing is to pump his investments. Duh.

And, yet, further….

You have to give it to the sector and its participants. There is an extraordinary hubris/will-to-win that drives people to formulate effectively the downsides of the entire world and human activity as being cured by something related to crypto.

Of course, the biggest thing that is hung out there is “decentralization”. Removing human/institutional control and responsibility for any given endeavor is something almost always completely unassailable. However, in such a context, those with the most means and power intent on maximizing their returns (money/power) will always win.

This seems to be recognized by Mr. Gillick. After making vast amounts of arguments about the virtue of decentralization, he states:

“Offensive content will remain on the internet but exploring ways to more easily identify the people who spread the offensive content or make it more difficult to spread content virally is possible through the emerging concept of curation markets and staking identities.
“ If users of Dapps and websites are required to log in through sovereign digital identity apps at login portals could enhance cull fake accounts thus slowing the spread of violent or offensive content.”

I have no idea what this could mean, but it seems to suggest that there be a gatekeeper. Or that everyone has to use their real and traceable name? Beats me. Well, nice try. But at least he tried.