My take is that it's more meaningful to look at cryptos from a...

My take is that it's more meaningful to look at cryptos from a global perspective.

For first world countries the use case for cryptos is pretty much zero except may be acted as an alternative asset class. At least they are largely redundant for daily usage as these countries already have relatively reliable government and financial system. At the end of the day I feel safe with any government-back currencies as long as the government is sound and reliable.

The same can't be said for third world countries. Where would you put your wealth into if you believe your country along with its currency can collapse in any instance and you want to be able to access your wealth anytime you need them without hassle? Gold vs digital currencies, which one is more convenient theoretically? What if your country limits your ability to buy other currencies due to political reasons etc?

I don't invest in any cryptos and in fact I think a majority of them will disappear eventually leaving may be the largest 2 to 3 digital coins served as the ultimate safeguards/intermediates to transfer wealth if shit does hit the fans in a global sense - nothing lasts forever including the strongest countries on earth.

The market will sort out the right price for cryptos in due course and I won't participate as there is too much uncertainty for me from a pricing perspective.

Having said that I can understand why Jack is into Bitcoin as it fits the philosophy of why he built Square in the first place and I'm good with Block taking the initiatives to build the foundations as long as the projects won't disrupt Block's BAU operations.