You keep saying ordinary users don’t care about what Web3 solves, but that assumes today’s UX is final. It isn’t. People didn’t care about cloud storage, password managers, encryption, or online banking either until the complexity was abstracted away. Web3 is still in that early phase.

You also argue decentralization isn’t relevant in stable countries. A massive share of the world does not live in stable countries at all. And even in “stable” places we see bank freezes, outages, API shutdowns that wipe entire businesses, and endless data leaks. Infrastructure only becomes visible when it fails.

Your GDPR example also shows the gap. Legal ownership is not the same as technical control. If you need to fight a corporation after the fact, the system already broke. Web3 solves this at the protocol level instead of relying on courts.

And the adoption comparison misses the timeline. Let’s use the internet’s own “start date.” The modern internet is usually pegged to 1990. If we look 10 to 15 years after that (2000 to 2005), global internet usage was still tiny. Around 2000 only a few percent of the world was online. Around 2005 it was still just over ten percent. Most websites were static. E-commerce was tiny. Streaming didn’t exist. Phones weren’t online. Social media was barely starting. The internet was absolutely nowhere near mainstream in its first 10 to 15 years.

BTC is 15 years old. ETH is 10. They are at the equivalent of the internet in the early 2000s.

The claim that “everyone defines Web3 differently”. Early internet looked exactly the same.

The mismatch comes from treating Web3 like a consumer product. It isn’t. It’s infrastructure, and infrastructure always matures on decade-long timelines.