These videos are generally written and hosted by SalesBros who are mostly writing and performing for Youtube's recommendation engine. They do more harm than good. "Hi, I'm a talking head, here's my clipart, significant search term buzzword jargon, like and subscribe see you next time." I made it 2 1/2 minutes into it and I talk about this shit to skeptics multiple times a week.

Your objections, however, are easily answered:

This will never overcome the sales and marketing power of the big boys and girls for the majority of consumers.

The big boys and girls lose their leverage. "aggregate all my shit on Youtube" goes away when you don't need to go to Youtube to see videos. "I hate Facebook's ads" ceases to matter when you don't need a Facebook to serve you updates from your friends. "Reddit is censoring my posts" ceases to matter when the censorship is per user, chosen by the user, rather than by the site choosing for everyone.

Most people aren't all that worried about being censored which is a good chunk of this guys sales pitch.

Of course it is, that's what TechBros are all about. The chinstrokers will work the word "fiat" into the conversation within the first three sentences. The important thing to consider, though, is "censorship" is the majority of the labor at any organization that posts controversial content. If that organization gets blown up because their aggregation is no longer useful, then the idea of "censorship" pretty much shifts: Web3 permits a pull model of subscription, rather than push, which means the onus is on the receiver rather than the transmitter.

It will give the librarian crypto set something to jack off to for the next decade, which is nice I suppose.

I'm gonna leave that typo in there because it's hilarious and awesome, but beyond that, the Randians are gonna be bummed because "survival of the fittest" becomes "thriving of the community." The architecture of the web these days is "everything, cut down to what's appropriate" while the architecture is about to be "nothing, except what you chose to add."

Anything good or useful in the tech will be subsumed by big business and government and put into a package that grandma can handle.

This presumes that they have insurmountable advantages. They have advantages, I agree - I've argued before that the first company to figure out how to offer "credit card protection" on a crypto wallet is going to win, at least until someone else does it for less.

"Government" has already subsumed it in China - they're kicking out all the ground-up crypto in favor of their own top-down social system. It's gonna kill innovation, though, and curtail their trade practices. When the Treasure Fleet becomes conditional on your continued worship of their system lest you anger the Emperor, the Treasure Fleet is left in the harbor. The United States, on the other hand, seems to be circling around "remember to pay your taxes" - that $600 moneysniffer letter that the IRS put out also explicitly prevents any investigation of person-to-person transactions within a noncustodial wallet. In other words, the US Government sure looks like they're favoring innovation over censorship, so long as they get paid (the $600 isn't "$600" it's "reportable 1099 income").

There's a growing consensus within the bureaucracy of the US government that monopoly has been bad for the country but nobody has the teeth to do anything about it because Free Market. Here's the CEO of Walmart begging congress to raise the minimum wage. By adopting a "pay your taxes and innovate" framework for crypto/Web3, the United States is basically choosing to do the exact opposite of China.

I wouldn't write this stuff off just because everybody talking about it is just shilling their stock. As mk told me, the guys who actually understand it are spending their time writing apps not sales pitches.