Well of course there's no way to prove it now. Could you have proved how revolutionary the internet would be in its early days? You have to be open minded and extrapolate from the principles of the new system and its interactions with society at large to _guess_ how impactful it may be. I believe the fundamental principles of crypto (open, permissionless, decentralized, global, neutral, etc.) make it highly likely to revolutionize finance.

> Could you have proved how revolutionary the internet would be in its early days?

Yes. Yes, you could. 10 years after ARPANet was made public you already had things like France's Minitel.

Blockchains? They still have zero use cases: https://medium.com/@kaistinchcombe/ten-years-in-nobody-has-c...

> You have to be open minded and extrapolate

Ah yes. "Revolutionary tech", and all you have to do is blindly believe in it.

This zero use cases rhetoric is really low effort. Here are some just off the top of my head.

sovereign store of value (useful if your government sucks)

permissionless payments (funding wikileaks)

private/anonymous transactions (Monero)

event tickets (good use of NFTs)

synthetic assets (anyone/anywhere can speculate on TSLA)

decentralized asset exchange - AMM

decentralized prediction markets

DAO - a new way for people to organize and form internet native companies

> This zero use cases rhetoric is really low effort.

It isn't if you cared to at least read the link I provided

As to your use cases. First the obvious ones:

- event tickets. Have literally zero need for blockchain. NFTs are scam, and nothing but scam. All the fictional properties ascribed to ticketing via NFTs I've covered in my to responses to this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29282931

- synthetic assets, decentralized asset exchange, decentralized prediction markets. Require neither bitcoin, nor blockchains nor crypto. Used almost exclusively for trading fictional tokens, scams, and pretending it's innovation.

The less obvious ones:

- sovereign store of value (useful if your government sucks)

"Let's convert our value into a fictional token that has no value outside the fictional world, and can't be used for anything but buying other digital tokens".

Buy food? Oh, you have to convert it to real money (because no one in the world, especially not in the world where government sucks, accepts these fictional tokens). Or if someone does accept it, oops, random transaction fees just doubled your cost.

Buy actual physical assets? "When your government sucks", people prefer dollars and euro to fictional tokens.

- permissionless payments

This is a very tiny part that is arguably useful, but it comes with a plethora of issues that make them unusable for wide adoption. Among them, reversibility, enforcement.

How a tech enthusiast doesn't think these are all extremely interesting is beyond me.

All of these are as interesting as working at a bank or at a stock exchange (and those can be significanty more interesting due to amount of data they process).

Unless, of course, you're interested in outright scams like NFT. Yup, those are "interesting".