So if a blockchain was leveraging a proof of stake [1] along with zero-knowledge rollups [2] for scalability/ compute you would have no arguments for it? In that hypothetical example it seems like a much better alternative to IPFS with no moral qualms.
Suppose they use a fully centralized oracles, isn't there still a huge benefit in having much lower fees and tighter spreads, even if it's not decentralized? For the end user, having settlement, custody, and market making decentralized while having centralized oracles is still a huge advantage.
Then consider that people are tackling the issue of decentralized oracles. The most common platform for that is Chainlink [1]. In this space specifically, Augur [2] is among those who has attempted to make decentralized sports reporting Oracles. I'm not sure if their solution is fully fleshed out, but regardless it doesn't seem to be an insurmountable technical issue for something that is as easy to verify as outcome of a game.
If your willing to accept that the Oracle problem will be solved, I'm not sure how you would say this doesn't create value for consumers.
What do you think about cryptocurrency enabled sports betting and prediction markets? There's a pretty clear technical path to these replacing traditional sports betting market makers and I personally cannot wait. Current market makers like DraftKings still put out betting lines with insane spreads, because in the US atleast, their markets are protected by regulatory capture.
This [1] is one of the projects I have my eye on in this space but there is many that are starting to get to work now that a lot of the technical issues around Oracles are being sorted out.
1. https://ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms... 2. https://ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/scaling/zk-rollups/#....