That's the thing though, the stated goal of all this is for it to work without it being run by firms. Most of these projects are explicitly firms, or firms masquerading as not firms, or firms that have a clear goal to dissolve stewardship when these projects can run themselves, and there are a couple that aren't firms. As this process continues, there will be lots of projects running without a company of any kind. Once that happens, what are governments like that of New York going to be able to do?
Regulators tend to not be super proactive and hypothetical, right? I suspect they'll wait until people losing money in truly community driven crypto markets becomes a significant issue, and then chip away wherever they interact with the real world, in New York.
Well all those regulators will manage to accomplish is to stagnate their own financial centers and lose out on changes in the financial services industry.
The city of new York supplanted the City of London as the worldwide financial powerhouse very early last century. This was partly (though not primarily) due to regulatory environments in the City of London to protect entrenched interests, thus putting them behind the curve and allowing this new, innovative city to take momentum in the financial industry. As the financial industry changes rapidly, particularly as it democratizes, we will see less influence from these behemoth financial centers, but anything one of them does to try to hinder these changes to protect itself will only accelerate it's demise within this industry. New York is making one of the mistakes the City of London did in the 20th century and it will pay for it.
