Earlier quoted context omitted.
Claiming that technology A shares the same issues as technology B while technology B is all the hype doesn’t exactly spell out why I should use technology B over technology A. And this is assuming I actually accept your claim that they share the same issues . . .
I think the selling point for JWTs are that they're a mostly-standardized way to do auth tokens such that you only need to do one very simple and cheap database query (is this a token that has been invalidated but hasn't yet expired) rather than a larger number of database round-trips to implement various authorization checks.
The main use cases for JWT are:
* I want to create a session token that I _never_ want to revalidate against a database, and still trust that the only way it can exist is if a user has logged in at some point. This means that you're not going to be and to log a user out of your system, but that can be a valid trade-off in some situations (e.g. low-security applications where the cost of storage is very high, or microservice architectures where the token can be validated on ingress but doesn't need to be revalidated later).
* I want to include role (or other) information directly in the token for the sake of convenience, so I never need to pull information from other sources (in which case there are definitely other ways to do this, but just using a JWT library and using the result as a session token might be easier than the alternatives).
But most cases of using JWT tokens that I've seen has basically involved using them as overly complicated session tokens with all the same problems, and none of the benefits that JWT itself can bring. In that case, you may as well just take the easier option in the first place.