> I know the cryptocurrency community has this absurd notion that nothing without cryptographic proof could or should ever be regarded as evidence. That trustin

> I know the cryptocurrency community has this absurd notion that nothing without cryptographic proof could or should ever be regarded as evidence. That trusting institutions, people, or processes marks you as a gullible fool, and that the Federal Reserve is conspiracy by private banks to keep the gentile from the levers of power[0]. So this is the not entirely novel situation of crypto being proposed to solve a problem that doesn't exist, and failing due to the lack of (usually: active hostility to) subject matter expertise. It reads like you count me in with the cryptocurrency community. If anyone else does: don't. I'm pointing out one single place were blockchain can be useful and then immediately pointing out that it isn't strictly necessary.