So your point is that some technologies take a lot longer to mature than average, for example {some examples}, and the delay itself should not be held against such late-blooming technologies.

I'm onboard with that. Although your argument may benefit from better phrasing, because it actually does come across like that, which is a disservice to your advocacy effort.

Back on topic, I don't see a lot of people in this thread saying "it's been forever and nothing came of it, let's just end the whole thing." What people are saying here is that there is no foreseeable legitimate (and legal) use case for the crypto currencies, hence let's not start the frenzy just yet. We should have a proposed legitimate use case first and a frenzy second, otherwise it's indistinguishable from millions of other exciting idea. Just because this particular idea excites you doesn't mean it has potential.

So where is the potential? What is the use case?