The stock-market valuations of the late 1990s were excessive, but the objectives of the actual companies were fairly reasonable. Trading... over the internet. Order your pet food... over the internet. Eventually many of these things actually happened, they just weren't done by the "first movers" who were represented in the stock market bubble.
What's happening now, in the cryptocurrency milieu, is more deranged. It's to the point that it's making technology itself seem like a joke.
What really got me to understand what an NFT is was a post in a gold / silver subredit. A poster asked the question "Where could I find someone who could make a physical NFT gold and silver coin". I really didn't understand what that meant so I asked. They answered that it was going to be a intricately designed coin that was a physical NFT.
This physical NFT was just a coin. Nothing special, no blockchain just a coin.
After this I realized that all these NFT's are completely worthless. You wouldn't buy a physical coin that some random guy (Talented artiest but still) for millions. Why would it be different if its digital?
I could be wrong and NFT's will somehow become the next massive institution but I don't think so.
> Sadly crypto-currencies still haven't really solved the currency use-case.
I'm not a fan of this space, but I surveyed many crypto tokens last year and it did sound like some well designed tokens could solve the use-case as an actual currency. Algorand springs to mind, they claimed high transactions speeds and also carbon negative footprint (which sounds too good to be true, but I don't know the specifics).
What's happening now, in the cryptocurrency milieu, is more deranged. It's to the point that it's making technology itself seem like a joke.