I'm by no means suggesting it has a neutral effect.
Expanding currency markets isn't so much an innovation as it is an inevitability. While not completely square, the creation of the Federal Reserve System offers some analogous parallels. Creating a single system ostensibly gave the US Government the platform to directly guide capital distribution (a reaction to the string of smaller economic depressions leading up to the turn-of-the-century); in the process, it also freed up a capital to places where it was not previously accessible and that persist to this day. In reality, the impetus for Congress to create the Federal Reserve was the fact that burgeoning markets fueled by the industrial revolution needed more capital than regional banks could reliably provide. Leading up to Black Monday, however, it was also increasingly clear that a steady, reliable flow of capital needed to have a robust controls to prevent it from being misdirected to catastrophic consequences.
The point is that the Reserve didn't come into existence in a vacuum. It addressed a financial constriction in the same way, crypto and NFTs address a future where fiat currency and physical property instruments aren't plentiful enough. Ultimately, crypto and NFTs are going to be used by businesses as a way of gathering resources, either as a stable place to store reserves or as a way of building collateral to finance operations. On the one hand, you can't restrict them as implements without restricting the economic engine that business will potentially provides (like jobs, infrastructural investment, tax base). On the other hand, you can't allow the implements to be used without difference to their ability to fuel inflation or serve as depletion to that same tax base (as a tax shelter, for instance). As was eventually the case with the Federal Reserve, the government has to also build up back end controls while seeking to open crypto and NFT markets to everyone.