Facebook's Libra stable coin has seen better days. Recently even more initial backers dropped out, although the project is far from over, the future prospects of Libra are dim.

Some view these failures as positives for freedom, ultimately arguing that further centralization under Facebook's grubby hands would be the opposite of progress. But further still, some are arguing that the project should be brought to a halt through regulation or other similar means. It is here that I must protest.

I too find growing internet domination by a handful of companies alarming but resorting to wield state power to curb this aspect would not only be wrong on a moral basis, it would be counterproductive in the pragmatic sense as well. 

On moral grounds why would Roger Ver be allowed to create Bitcoin Cash and why would Brendan Eich be allowed to create BAT if Facebook is not allowed to create the Libra? Why should Facebook not be afforded the same freedom as others on the basis that they have greater means and influence? I would argue that they should be afforded those freedoms and they should not be restricted in their development of the Libra coin.

Taking a more pragmatic view on the topic and we see rather quickly that regulation is something that has repeatedly hurt the prospects of cryptocurrencies. If we let any state start to meddle in the affairs of who can and can't create currencies it is bound to push us along a slippery slope of further regulation.

Personally I don't like Facebook and I don't want their currency to take hold, but one thing worse than Facebook is the risk of starting down the path of perpetual increases of government intervention in this wonderful field of cryptos, blockchains and dApps.