From an engineering perspective, this is stupid, although not quite as bad as "casting votes on the blockchain." You want a tamper-proof record? We can make so

From an engineering perspective, this is stupid, although not quite as bad as "casting votes on the blockchain." You want a tamper-proof record? We can make something orders of magnitude better in almost every way [0] with a regular distributed database! There's a predefined closed set of member-nodes, variously controlled by the 50 different US state governments, a handful of federal agencies, and maybe even few reputable private organizations if you really want to. This gives you 95% of the benefits, 5% of the drawbacks. Modifying the records would require a ridiculously large conspiracy, and the result wouldn't even be secret. Modifying it secretly would require such a total takeover that if that happens your country has much bigger problems. In either case, remember that there are no assurances the data being appended is actually true in the first place, only that someone didn't change or delete it later. [1] ___________ [0] Ex: Much less CPU power; lower latency/clearing-delays; no transaction fees; less disk space; easier to upgrade protocols; separate from external crazy crypto-drama like hard forks; and basically immune to a country like China barging in with a conscripted botnet. (See also: "Great Cannon of China.") [1] Data-integrity is clearly not what Republicans and their tool Musk actually care about implementing, you can tell because they're busy stealth-deleting records willy-nilly across the entire federal government right now.