[ignoramous]

> It doesn’t even appear that the underlying distributed computer network has anything to do with blockchain.

I think the blockchain acts a transparency ledger among a distributed set of distrusting participants. Think: if PirateBay could pay you to seed magnet-links all the while knowing for sure you've not tampered with the the amount of bandwidth you've claimed to have lent, and the network then rewarding (paying) you the equivalent amount that you're owed for your troubles. "Blockchain" enables that.

The ICOs are akin to companies filing for IPOs. The ICOs don't strictly need speculation (because the utility of their network ideally would have an inherent, demonstrable value that dictates the price of the network's coin), but they do need the market to trade their coins, because that's how anyone participating in the network would be able to convert their rewards into fiat. (note: at this point, we're essentially reinventing Ehtereum, the super computer, as originally envisioned...)

You could aruge that many of these networks could avoid doing ICOs and simply use one of the existing cross-chain coins from Cosmos, Algorand, Polkadot (or even stable coins like USDC, Diem, Celo, BUSD, DAI etc), but it is the summer of crypto, and everyone's got to do an ICO.