I might have a very cynical look here, and if so, I apologize. I do not agree with this cynical look (in terms of taking action on it), but I do think that this

I might have a very cynical look here, and if so, I apologize. I do not agree with this cynical look (in terms of taking action on it), but I do think that this is how a part of the blockchain world operates. While blockchain is a revolutionairy technology, to some degree, it's a much more revolutionary political tool in order to raise funds. The revolutionary technology part is that we have a new P2P technique that allows for decentralized consensus, which is amazing! However, as the author implicitly points out, there are quite a few limited uses for this. Blockchain as a political tool however means that the project founder is suddenly able to raise money. I personally know a few people that simply said "yep, we're doing blockchain" only because it allowed them to raise million(s) of dollars. And otherwise they couldn't. I know from one founder that he is serious with that project had that idea for years, and blockchain was the political tool in order for him to raise money. The other founder simply wanted to use 50% for development, 25% for community engagement and he wants to take the other 25% as profit. I'm not here to judge. I'm simply writing this comment, because I feel that some people look too technically at blockchain and disregard the rest, while I feel that people need to be aware of this political side of blockchain. The strong idealism and believe in a high ROI is what fuels the IPOs (still to this day). Because of that, people will invest in it and create new projects with it.