I can concede that Bitcoin has failed as a currency and that as an alternative for payments. But can we stop talking about crypto and thinking that Bitcoin is t

I can concede that Bitcoin has failed as a currency and that as an alternative for payments. But can we stop talking about crypto and thinking that Bitcoin is the only thing that matters? > The supposed lightning network tends to centralisation Well, let's put Bitcoin aside. The argument you are using here can also apply to Ethereum scaling solutions, and it is misguided at best and dishonest at worst. Yes, scaling solutions sacrifice some decentralization in favor of performance. But to argue that it "defeats the purpose" is like saying "the Internet is not decentralized because most people access it through a handful of service providers" and that the only "right" way to access the Internet is by mesh networks. Decentralization by itself is not a goal. The goal is to have a system that is censorship resistant and that can be an alternative to the status quo. If most people achieve these goals by using (regulated and well-managed) exchanges, or if smaller communities pool their resources to participate in the economy, you are still "centralizing" but you are not "defeating the purpose". Another way to put it: say that you want to serve a community that is not served on underserved by the main banks. What would be the cost to fund and operate a credit cooperative? On the other hand, what would be the cost to setup and operate a Raiden or a Hub20 node to give people a custodial wallet?