Cryptocurrencies do tend not to stay "pure". In order to gain even more momentum a lot of them try to have functions of other things that have already been established. For example now we have coins that pay you dividents like a stock of a corporation. We already have many coins that give you certain voting rights (again a lot like a stock).

Backing up a crypto with real tangible assets is something that comes from securities (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/security.asp). Simply told, a security is a piece of paper( a document) that manifests a right to get a monetary asset from a debtor, who is obliged to give it to you. The price of the security is not that of the piece of paper but reflects the asset it manifests. This same thing is beginning to happen to some cryptocurrencies.

It is a real phylosophical debate, whether cryptos should stay "pure" and really dusrupt the past and create really a "new economy", or should they adopt the usages of other already existing things and mix them with blockchain technology to basically becomes somewhat of a mix between the two, so that adoption of this new tech become more widespread.

I''ll love to hear some opinions on the manner?