Bitcoin lost the last man standing argument when it decided to go mainstream and not pursue privacy. There was a failure to acknowledge that blockchains are best suited for censorship resistant tx--it may be (somewhat) decentralized, but traceability means that tx can be monitored and refused or held until exchanges get approval from an authority. There are far better solutions for normal tx (scale, speed) and also for censorship resistant tx, Bitcoin is poor at both. You can say lightening network will fix these issues, but that is a ways off and second layer solutions are less efficient than layer one solutions--it's just a hoop to jump through to get where you want to go.
Good point on the privacy factor. But regarding scale and speed, I would say that we there isn't a need for scale and speed right now or in the future. I don't really care to pay for my coffee with Bitcoin. It's as if there was a need for lamborghini or rolls royce to figure out how to make their cars 100,000x faster. It just wouldn't happen. Not everyone can afford lambos and rolls--only rich people buy them and the rate and the price is just fine for them. As with Bitcoin, it'll be for people with lots of money doing business internationally and needing a medium to transfer the funds. At that point, I wonder if privacy is even necessary or warranted because if you're transfer large amounts of money, it's a bad idea to do it for illegal reasons (hence the need for privacy).