I read a recent opinion piece that sort of mellowed my feelings on the space, basically that crypto was never made to be mainstream (I'd argue many would view w

I read a recent opinion piece that sort of mellowed my feelings on the space, basically that crypto was never made to be mainstream (I'd argue many would view widespread use as 'meaningful'). Most of my thinking you can read crypto as bitcoin i.e. some general payment system, where in bitcoin's case its stated purpose is sort of this inexorable transaction system, it feels intuitive that the meaningful use space is intrinsically going to be fringe/taboo, because it's outside government, outside permission. I know its cliche that freedom isn't free, but what is the honest practical value of freedom unless it's scarce i.e. its impossible or someone it trying to stop you? But the point is that crypto may be an inherently fringe construct, it may provide no benefit to society because its value add might solely live in activities outside the confines of society at large. Now you can argue whether that is a net positive or negative for humanity, but I think that if "that's it", you know, I think that is a meaningful use.