Directs the question to a discussion or criticism of Annacism or other ideologies is not such meaningful. The core point I was trying to make by clarifying is the development of DeFi and other blockchain applications is unstoppable. If you check the SEC's latest article Statement on DeFi Risks, Regulations, and Opportunities, you will see that there is nothing they can do about the platforms on the chain. They can ask developers to give relevant data to cooperate with regulation, but in the future such regulation will only seem more impotent. Take Uniswap as an example. The appropriate information has been provided by Uniswap Labs (Uniswap’s dev team) to the regulator to assist in the investigation, however, the Uniswap protocol can still be accessed through a decentralized (uniswap.eth.link) method other than app.uniswap.org, which is managed by Uniswap Labs. uniswap.eth.link consists of the decentralized domain name ENS, the decentralized storage IPFS and the centralized access portal (eth.link or cloudflare), through which we can access the Uniswap decentralized front-end in all browsers. If app.uniswap.org is restricted by regulation, we can use Uniswap entirely through uniswap.eth.link. Decentralised domain names, decentralised storage ensure that the user layer and service provider are free from regulation, while BlockChain Oracle and public chain smart contracts keep the on-chain data and financial activities not influenced by regulators.

Whether governments accept it or not, they are no longer able to stop decentralized finance from having an increasing impact on traditional economic activity. Thus, the statement of “Slowly exploring a better path to embrace something new like cryptocurrency” and “compliance development” seems practically impossible to achieve. It's not a matter of choosing one or the other route, it's a reality you have to accept. Anyone in this world, including regulators, investors, have to accept the swelling value of cryptocurrencies’ market cap in the future. 

So, we might better turn our attention to this intriguing new ethics-related question: how do we deal with the development of an industry when regulators are powerless to regulate it, especially when it faces two structural obstacles: lack of transparency and anonymity.  This is a question that all relevant will need to think about for a long time to come, and please forgive me that I can't give a solution in this reply. You may think about this issue together.

Looking back at the history of cryptography, humans have the technology to accomplish trustworthy privacy calculations and blockchain minimizes the amount of mandatory trust for any individual participant in the system, and with the complete decentralization of finance, I am optimistic that "there will be new ways to accomplish the so-called internal regulation of decentralized systems".