I mean, I would argue that the use cases people come up with simply pre-suppose the idea that "absolute power corrupts absolutely" and that there will be at lea

I mean, I would argue that the use cases people come up with simply pre-suppose the idea that "absolute power corrupts absolutely" and that there will be at least some people out there who would--or at least should--value avoiding giving those players such power. If, tomorrow, everyone suddenly forgot what e-mail was and someone suddenly tried to invent it there would be a ton of people angry that it served no purpose and would ever catch on because it would be full of spam and people would have to run their own email servers instead of using centralized messaging servers and all the same arguments people make about crypto would re-surface ("well, maybe people could run servers on behalf of other people" "well doesn't that undermine your precious decentralization?" "somewhat, sure, but federation is still valuable" etc.).