> You’re not seeing how something performative can be both profitable and useless?
Moneygram and their customers with other organizations using the Stellar network is not performative. It exists and works today, right now and it was that 'something' that was used, tried and tested first before making a decision and it turns out that the use-case was valid for them (and many others).
Henceforth, it is not 'useless' going by the OP's original broad claim.
> Maybe it's semantic. I'm not saying crypto is useless as a moral judgement. The bumblebee keychain on my backpack is functionally useless...
Again, the main use of the Stellar network was serious enough for MoneyGram which out of the thousands of other alternatives used to get on another rails (crypto) for their worldwide customers after assessing that use-case.
But you've only made it clear that to you it is "useless" and no user or business would even bother to use it, if it was found to be as such in the first place.
Moneygram and their customers with other organizations using the Stellar network is not performative. It exists and works today, right now and it was that 'something' that was used, tried and tested first before making a decision and it turns out that the use-case was valid for them (and many others).
Henceforth, it is not 'useless' going by the OP's original broad claim.
> Maybe it's semantic. I'm not saying crypto is useless as a moral judgement. The bumblebee keychain on my backpack is functionally useless...
Again, the main use of the Stellar network was serious enough for MoneyGram which out of the thousands of other alternatives used to get on another rails (crypto) for their worldwide customers after assessing that use-case.
But you've only made it clear that to you it is "useless" and no user or business would even bother to use it, if it was found to be as such in the first place.