Bitcoin Exchange-Traded Products

SEC-approved ETP's are likely a safer way for investors to trade Bitcoin than some previous arrangements, but if they encourage some investors to trade Bitcoin who would not otherwise have done so, these ETPs may harm those investors.

It's not the SEC's job to stop people from making what it thinks are bad investments. I don't think investors as a whole are better off holding bitcoin, but I've been wrong before and so has the SEC. "Investors better off" is not the question for regulation!
-see background information here

The SEC correctly acted as mandated, providing access to products meeting given legal requirements. Beyond that, SEC is not there to judge welfare (See Gary Gensler's comments.) Welfare is not improved by wider speculation in a zero-sum risky asset like Bitcoin.
-see background information here

Unless it becomes a widely used medium of exchange, bitcoin should eventually implode. The alternative is that all I learned from monetary theory about how currencies acquire value is meaningless.

It might have been measurable if the SEC had approved the first ETF application in 2013 when BTC was at $90. Now, after 10+ years of stonewalling BTC=$44,000. The SEC failed the very investors that it was charged to protect in the 1933. DeFi is promising. Look for ETH ETF next.
-see background information here

Probably won't have much an effect on overall crypto market since there are a number of ways to already gain exposure to the asset class.

Given the initial demand, have to believe that investors believe they are better off. Revealed preference. And it is measurable.

it is dangerous to argue that the government knows better and should protect people from having the choice to invest easily in bitcoin. but at some point I expect this to end in tears and would rather not have regular investors owning this stuff

It may lower the cost and can broaden access, which may be a good thing for those who'd like exposure to Bitcoin. However, there already are ETFs on futures and, as long as the spot-futures basis is not too extreme, I am unsure the spot ETFs provide a measurable benefit.

First, it reduces transactions costs, which is a positive for investors who would have purchased bitcoin anyway. However, it will likely cause more investors to purchase bitcoin, which may be negative given the lack of connection to a real asset, unclear value proposition, etc

Giving investors access to a new asset will increase the opportunity set, but the effect is likely to be small.

Investors get a non-interest bearing asset without getting any of the purported licit and illicit transaction benefits of bitcoin(That said, it is not the SEC's job to prevent investors from making bad investments. What the SEC should or should not do is a different question).

Unclear whether the benefits for some investors who would otherwise be investing on unregulated exchanges & crypto scams outweighs the costs to investors drawn into investing in non-interest bearing money with unstable value.

Consumer will now have access to BTC through a regulated exchange. This should reduce intermediation fees.

More confusion (and false certification) for consumers

Better off from the perspective of the those trading them? Of course. Better off from the perspective of a social planner? Unclear.