[Procedural]

> And why would anyone need to be able to verify that?

Because, in the bank example, after a bank transaction happens, the artist may not like a particular supporter because, for example, the supporter may be a white cis male who doesn't like the left bullies, so the artist may lie that the transaction happened at all, saying that he/she didn't receive any money from the supporter. In this case, and other such cases, there must be an independent log of events that actually happened, despite what people may say.

[Ekaros]

The supporter could ask bank to mail him a receipt from the transfer. And then show this transfer or have it notarized in most extreme case. Thus proofing he made it. We already have solutions for this.

And then there are court system to be involved if the artist were to commit fraud in this case and for example not provide services. Maybe even discrimination case.

[Procedural]

> The supporter could ask bank to mail him a receipt from the transfer. And then show this transfer or have it notarized in most extreme case. Thus proofing he made it. We already have solutions for this.

No one will believe the supporter. The receipt may be a fake text he/she made.

[Ekaros]

Those people who don't believe a notarized document are unlikely to believe a blockchain entry either. After all it could be hacked? Or faked?

[Procedural]

> After all it could be hacked? Or faked?

The whole premise of blockchain is that no transaction can be altered. What happened -- happened, unlike someone's text or screenshots on someone's servers on the Internet.

[usrbinbash]

Or the Blorkchain is forked.