They make a pretty common point. Nobody around e.g. me has an ability to have even a glimpse of understanding what eth/crypto is except for speculation and low-tech fraud, and then for me "sharing value like art and album via crypto as a futuristic mean to share digital values" is bird-gibberish nonsense. General population will never be too smart on average to benefit from this "whatever".
The same is true about the majority of the workings of the internet, or the electrical engineering that built their phones or dozens of other things people use everyday without understanding. How is that relevant in this case?
Well to be fair, transferring money instantly would be pretty great for 2020.
I mean, the only way I can pay rent to my landlord in 2020 is by having my bank send them a physical check that takes 5d to arrive (during which time no-one gets any interest), or then use multiple Zelle payments since I have an artificial cap that is lower than my rent.
But crypto proponents describe use cases, not inner workings. Use cases for telecom were obvious much earlier that the internet itself, thousands of years of lost messages and messengers.
So uh, this remote sound transmitter seems like it might find niche use in the classical music orchestra space, but we don't see the talk-to-friends use case working out. Who would want to talk to their friends that often?
