The hint at her anecdote not holding true in the general case comes right after: "While BitPesa is still happy with Bitcoin for now, Rossiello did note that it’s annoying that on-chain transactions have become much more expensive.
Rossiello went as far as to say there will be a mass exodus away from Bitcoin if a countermeasure for high fees is not deployed within the next twelve months; however, she pointed to the Lightning Network as a possible solution to this issue."
OK so the CEO of a Bitcoin payment company is annoyed that Bitcoin is increasingly worse than alternatives and she is hoping the Lightning Network will redeem it, otherwise there will be a "mass exodus".
That's hardly a convincing case for Bitcoin being the better alternative for payments and reads more like all other blockchain things: an experiment. Experiments are good as long as we're keeping track of their costs and being honest about the results.
It obviously is for the CEO who continues to use Bitcoin despite the annoyances, so I'm not really following your logical leaps, nor do I have the energy to chase you through your goalpost moving. You said there are no beneficial uses, and I provided you with one example.
You can say that I said "beneficial use cases" and show me that you can actually send money using Bitcoin. But that's like me showing you a 5-wheeled car and saying "see, you can get from A to B in a 5-wheeled car therefore a fifth wheel is beneficial". That's not sufficient and the CEO of BitPesa seems painfully aware of this.
That's quite a statement. Did you mean without beneficial use cases that you personally know of? Example I posted somewhere in this thread: https://www.forbes.com/sites/ktorpey/2017/12/31/bitpesa-ceo-...