IMO poor use of terms has lead to much confusion in the space.
Chains designed to answer the need for viable financial instruments in the digital space (BTC, XMR) are viewed in the same or similar categories with the “utility currencies” of decentralized networks (ATOM, AVAX, etc). As a result, they are all referred to as “Crypto currencies”; which is just not correct.
Digital currencies (BTC,XMR) are not in the same category and do not function for the same purposes as Network currencies.
Digital currencies are more like fiat money and network currencies are more like stocks. (I know most don’t want to frame it in those terms for fear of govs seeking reg over “stock-like” trade activity. But the fact remains that folk “invest” in those “network currencies “ because of their belief in the underlying tech of that network
That’s the main driver. To deny this is to simply be blind to it.
To be clear, most of the project in the “crypto “ space are not just sh*tcoins, they are absolute d0gsh*t.
That said, storage chains that i am familiar with demonstrate the need and a possible approach for addressing. However, the suffer from the same “public-by-default” issues as BTC and most of the space.
The only chain that I know of which the potential for real storage utility is
https://www.jackalprotocol.com/?trk=public_post-text which very small right now but they have a agent-central approach which puts the user truly in control of their data.
For me, if a project in this space is not working to place the control of data into the hands of the data creators/owners, it is not a project that will last in the long term.
