Great right?! So I can explain a little bit if you're interested. Custom JSON ops are essentially a way of storing code on the blockchain so that developers can make apps more decentralized and transparent but at very low cost (free even). This enables something we refer to as "Soft Consensus" which I like to describe as "trust through validation" rather than "trust through decentralized computation." The idea behind protocols like EOS and Ethereum is that in order for users to trust apps, the computations powering those apps must be performed by the blockchain itself. Steem's approach is different. We say that, yes, there are SOME computations users want done by the blockchain like those relating to token transfers, token vests, voting actions, the storing of speech (i.e. content), and a few others. But that's it. Developers can't ask Steem to "calculate Pi to 1,000,000 decimal points."
Bounding the amount of computational work Steem can be asked to do enables the efficiency which allows for many of the special features of Steem like free transactions. This creates a unique opportunity for developers, in that they can decentralize the mechanics of their app without incurring the costs that come from having that code processed by the blockchain. Granted, this is something that you can do on practically any blockchain. The problem is that this would be extremely expensive to do with any other blockchain, therefore if you were going to store your code on Ethereum you might as well have it computed by Ethereum as well.
Soft Consensus only really makes sense on Steem because of the speed and fee-less nature of it. By hosting the code to your app on Steem you accomplish two things: 1. you enable your code to be audited by developers who can then validate that you are executing the on-chain code faithfully, and 2. you open your code to 3rd party developers. For example, because the market for SteemMonster exists in Soft Consensus, as far as Steem is concerned, there is no such thing as SteemMonsters, just a bunch of meaningless custom JSON ops. But inside those custom JSON ops is all the code powering their market, which 3rd parties can use to build their own apps. So now anyone can build their own market for SteemMonsters cards, which is how PeakMonsters.com exists.
It is my thesis that of all the code needed to power a given app, 99% of that code does not need to be decentralized at all. Of the code that need to be decentralized (i.e. on a blockchain), 99% of that code (the 1%) only needs to be in soft consensus where it can be audited. Only the remainder (1% of 1%) needs to be on-chain and executed on-chain. I believe that what we try to do with Steem is to look at that .01% of code that is super critical for decentralized applications, and add those to Steem. This enables Steem to perform those Smart Contracts exceptionally well, at an unrivaled low cost.
Hope that helps!
I respect your right to feel that way, however, the key value add of Bitcoin and all blockchains is asset possession. Your argument for soft consensus is actually the same argument Peter Schiff makes for why he thinks Bitcoin has no value.
Schiff argues that gold is better than bitcoins in every way. This is because to him the soft consensus of validation that he owns the gold is enough.
This is in contrast to the "Not Your Keys, Not Your Bitcoin" argument. The argument for Bitcoin's value is that possession is crucial. Stocks, bonds, and commodities like gold and silver are not ever in your possesion even when you have a note that verifies that it belongs to you. Corporations still have many ways to get out of giving you the asset and/or the value of that asset.
The whole case being made by Bitcoiners and Etherians is that if you do not have full possession of your asset it isn't really yours. This becomes evidentally so in international business dealing wherein your ability to punish overseas businesses for misbehavior below the $20,000 range becomes quite difficult and rarely worthwhile.
Soft consensus is merely evidence of right to something. The problem with that is at the highest levels we see that evidence to a right is not enough. When Germany wanted to repatriate their gold the US Reserve bank indicated that it would take 7 years. That's ridiculous, if it was there it should not have taken so long. Clearly, possession is essential at all levels.
Now, if you need validation for a fairly non-valuable item then it is fine. No body cares about a receipt for a donut, but its good for it to be censorship-resistant in case someone claims that you walked out without paying. Soft consensus is great for accounting purposes, but for storing valuables like NFTs its not such a great thing.
Here's a perfect example of how validation is not enough. When MagicDice did their exit-scam, there was a mountain of evidence that MagicDice owed its players tokens/dividends. The Steem blockchain has transaction details full of validation of those players rights. Still, they got jack all.
Why is validation of ownership rights on the Steem blockchain not enough for the victims of MagicDice? Because if its not your keys, its not your bitcoin... Possession is everything.