My advice to you is to perhaps try less to narrow your views by thinking about block chains. I encourage you to think more about trees.
By placing that comment in this thread about anonymity, that exhibits to me you don't have a very good grasp of the technologies of crypto since block chain consensus algorithms are orthogonal to anonymity algorithms.
Trees and DAGs are not a solution for block chain consensus (and they have nothing to do with anonymity). They fork uncontrollably. This will all be explained. Just let Iota, Railblocks, etc. go forth, then at the appropriate time it will be explained they are technically flawed. We can't escape from proof-of-work (PoW) and maintain decentralized consensus.
Period. Proof-of-stake is discussed else where and I don't to repeat what I have already written in my archives (someday I will summarize it all in a paper).
Then of course there is no reason for me to elaborate. You seem to have cured cancer here as well and think you have it all under control.
If i'm to be honest though. I don't think you have even brushed the surface of zk-snarks and its ability to do away with the blockchain. I don't think you understand how it even functions or can potentially function. I'm sure one day we can chat, when your head is not so far up your ass that all you can see is what you are digesting.