Cryptocurrencies have been compared to Ponzi schemes, pyramid schemes and economic bubbles, such as housing market bubbles. Howard Marks of Oaktree Capital Management stated in 2017 that digital currencies were "nothing but an unfounded fad (or perhaps even a pyramid scheme), based on a willingness to ascribe value to something that has little or none beyond what people will pay for it", and compared them to the tulip mania (1637), South Sea Bubble (1720), and dot-com bubble (1999). The New Yorker has explained the debate based on interviews with blockchain founders in an article about the “argument over whether Bitcoin, Ethereum, and the blockchain are transforming the world”.
• Ethereum’s chart is displaying a textbook case of Gann’s cycles of an inner year. • These cycles can help determine trend direction months ahead of time. The Cycles of the Inner Year Some of the most important lessons that Gann taught were related to time. Gann said that time was the factor that dictated the direction of a trend. Gann focused heavily on time...
The semi-anonymous nature of cryptocurrency transactions makes them well-suited for a host of nefarious activities, such as money laundering and tax evasion. However, cryptocurrency advocates often value the anonymity highly. Some cryptocurrencies are more private than others. Bitcoin, for instance, is a relatively poor choice for conducting illegal business online, and forensic analysis of bitcoin transactions has led authorities to arrest and prosecute criminals. More privacy-oriented coins do exist, such as Dash, ZCash, or Monero, which are far more difficult to trace.
All of those factors make mining cryptocurrencies an extremely competitive arms race that rewards early adopters. However, depending on where you live, profits made from mining can be subject to taxation and Money Transmitting regulations. In the US, the FinCEN has issued a guidance, according to which mining of cryptocurrencies and exchanging them for flat currencies may be considered money transmitting. This means that miners might need to comply with special laws and regulations dealing with this type of activities.
In October 2015, a development governance was proposed as Ethereum Improvement Proposal, aka EIP, standardized on EIP-1. The core development group and community were to gain consensus by a process regulated EIP. A few notable decisions were made in the process of EIP, such as EIP-160 (EXP cost increase caused by Spurious Dragon Hardfork) and EIP-20 (ERC-20 Token Standard). In January 2018, the EIP process was finalized and published as EIP-1 status turned "active". Alongside ERC-20, notable EIPs to have become finalised token standards include ERC-721 (enabling the creation of non-fungible tokens, as used in Cryptokitties) and as of June 2019, ERC-1155  (enabling the creation of both fungible and non-fungible tokens within a single smart contract with reduced gas costs).
Essentially, any cryptocurrency network is based on the absolute consensus of all the participants regarding the legitimacy of balances and transactions. If nodes of the network disagree on a single balance, the system would basically break. However, there are a lot of rules pre-built and programmed into the network that prevents this from happening.