>The blockchain works by having multiple people host a node which contains ALL the data.
Right, essentially blockchain is a really messy way to solve the trust problem. But it does work, amazingly there is a real economy there. Growing, by number of users, each year, for almost ten years. By making the ledger public but with pseudonymous addresses it allows for a certain degree of privacy.
>So everyone who runs a node has to host the ALL the data.
No, they don't have to, but generally yes, they choose to. You can prune the data after verifying it in some implementations. But even then you have to keep a copy of the current unspent transaction data so you verify any new spends (which I think is over 2GB). That method isn't perfect, as when you need to rebuild the database for whatever reason you will have to re-download the entire thing. You don't need to host a node, if you give your trust away to a third party to do it for you.
>Why is this seen like it could have any use other than hosting shitcoins?
Because, in the real world, it already does have other uses. Not proven in the long run, but still as first attempts. Blockchain is here to stay. Even with all its many faults the problems like scaling and privacy are being worked on by a lot of dumb monkeys and eventually they tend to get a few things working.
There are a ton of scams. Just like there are a ton of scams on the net in general. Don't be an idiot. Don't invest in anything ever (everything is a gamble in life), just learn and research. Or take risks if you want to have a good chance of losing money.
There are also a ton of shitcoins, but who cares? Blockchain, even with all its flaws opened up a lot of potential. Economic potential to be sure, but also a lot of scam potential for gullible fools.
There are some solutions there involve replacing the blockchain entirely with another trustless technological solution. Some of which promise to combine all transactional data and unspent coin data into a tiny amount of data, like a single hash. In other words that would allow a small app on mobile devices to replace banks. I wouldn't disparage the possibility, knowing what I know, but I also wouldn't trust pure promises. When I see it, I will try it, and only then will I decide if I want to make small transactional tests with it. Then I will form an opinion. Your opinion seems based on scams, which is like judging the potential of all humanity by the masses of idiots. There doesn't need to be a general case of non-shittyness for there to be value therein.
You should learn about it if it interests you.
You should acquire some test coin (free on a testnet) and play with them if you want to.
You should buy some real (digital) coins and spend them on things or donate anonymously to something you believe in.
You should not treat it as a stock market like the gambling addicts or the scammers trying to get you to invest their "exciting new" thing.