People keep comparing the dotcom boom with crypto as if they're similar. They're not. One had extremely clear use cases and already contributed to society through easier to access information and faster communication. Crypto does not have.
I'd say the dotcom boom was quite a bit like it:
- Completely overvalued companies without any real utility scamming investors claiming to revolutize X by doing it "on the internet".
- Evading regulation and breaking local laws, playing cat and mouse with law enforcement (e.g. Napster, Megaupload).
But yeah, unlike with crypto there were also more reasonable use cases.
Alone the Bitcoin incentive to consume unlimited cheap energy.
50% attacks are really and are ignored.
I have plenty of arguments no one was answering reasonable. Instead people say stupid things like Bitcoin solves inflatiin because BTC are limited but just ignore that mBTC etc exist and it still lead to inflation or deflation as everything else.
Or all the green washing garbage people try to sell. Uhh Bitcoin can push renewable and wasted energy. No we just incentive burning gas for Bitcoin instead of thinking about how to make it economically and sustainable useful for us....
Is it dead? Nope but has it ever reached a reasonable thing? Nope it got hyped into the sky due to money scams but it's not even were it should be to be used like we currently use it.
The biggest issue for crypto is the hype
There is no real world use for WEB3 or NFT. Storage is expensive and the carbon footprint is nuts. It's not faster and it's not more secure. It can be hacked and it's not decentralised (ask Canadian Truckers about how safe their bitcoin was from government intervention)
People keep bringing back Amway, that doesn't mean it's not scammer rubbish.
On-chain also can't scale because you're not suppose to put something like a JPEG on the blockchain.
Only bitcoin still has an insane carbon footprint.
But Bitcoin still consumes electricity of an entire small country.