You transactions are resistant, but is the third party really unneeded on a purchase?
I will always prefer to trade without a third party who is spying on my transactions and adding that information to their databases.
If, let's say, someone wants to rip me off, shouldn't I have a third party to protect me somehow?
Most of the time you perform a credit card charge back, the credit card company refund you from their own funds and then pursue the seller to try to recover their losses. If the seller is bankrupt, was fake/anonymous, in another country, manages to evade them, etc., then they never recover that money. There is no reason that if bitcoin was adopted globally that some companies offering "buyer's insurance" or something similar wouldn't pop up.
And besides that, by being early you get the chance to mine more bitcoins than the ones a decade later.
Everyone on this forum had the exact same opportunity to mine bitcoin in the early days. Just because some did and most did not does not make it a pyramid scheme.
The holders rely on the global adoption and despite that, we've already said that it's useful.
Yes, that's my point. Without a use case it is worthless. There is nothing wrong with wanting to hold bitcoin as a long term hedge against failing fiat currencies, but if you want it to outperform fiat then it needs to have a use case as a currency.