I can't be arsed to take this discussion any more serious than I do until you come up with some more insightful comparisons than "Bitcoin = pets.com". Same idea as the claims that "Bitcoin = tulip bubble" or "Bitcoin = beanie babies".
There's really no point in arguing with someone who equates a major technological achievement that has half of the computer science world and a few percent of the economical world excited with an online store for pet food, even if both of them underwent a speculative mania phase.
I don't see why not, the analogy works as a distinction between
a bubble and the actual
revolutionary technological advancement (which is not "bitcoin VS the blockchain" but "bitcoin VS a distributed ledger technology that makes sense").
"major technological achievement that has
half of the computer science world excited"
Not sure about that claim. There are a lot of computer scientists who are either bashing it or at least acknowledging its big limitations (while admitting that the underlying idea behind the technology is worth it and actually revolutionary, but the blockchain implementation might not the the best one).
Same with the "few percent of the economic world". Are you sure you are not biased with these claims?
I'm not saying crypto or distributed ledger technologies are a fad. I'm saying that the bitcoin blockchain implementation and especially the idea of a stand-alone currency that is needed in the system is probably a fad.