Sheer fantasy. By my count, there are over 100 “projects” that are aimed at the same thing and none of them is even remotely close to measurable operation, let alone any degree of uptake or success.

Right at the end, the author inserts this:
“With such a high value placed on data, blockchains offer an infrastructure that can make transactions economically feasible while guaranteeing privacy and accuracy.

• The Ethereum blockchain is not yet scalable but the upcoming upgrades bring higher transaction throughput.”

This is at least slightly more honest than most of the other such projects. Blockchain architecture might be just as useful for any data storage or application usage as old-fashioned sequential file stores. But, no, the hash creation and linking of blocks makes it even less useful. So to make it useful again [fill in the blank].

The myriad strategies (sub-chains, off-chains, sharding, pre-computation of hashes, combo-strategies…) expose the store to all sorts of other problems and vulnerabilities.

Just try to think about this for a minute: what other technology that is being vaunted for its promise getting a: “Well, it doesn’t work well now, but maybe something will fix it…”

Blockchains (aka Merkle trees from 1979) have massive hoards of promoters, activists, investors, marketers, gurus, etc. swarming around with….. well, not much to offer but “it will eventually work and take over the world”.

No one had any such qualifications around xNix OSs, tcp/ip, http, browsers, dbs, rdbs, messaging, caching, VMs, cloud, etc.

Blockchain stands alone in the technology field as being an old technology that after being around for 30 years still needs something to make it work to make it reasonably usable. And has (tens of) thousands of people making or trying to make money off it now.

Stunning.