A couple of years ago, I identified two main usecases for blockchains: objective money/finance and objective identity

However, over time, I've warmed to the idea that objective identity does not actually require strict global consensus. A less strict, loosely ordered global consensus may be adequate

Really, it's only money that requires strict consensus, or anything else of *temporal* economic value

While identity does have economic value, it is in most cases non-temporal in nature, and can hence be achieved better with loosely ordered alternatives to blockchains

strict consensus might only be essential for financial transactions, where timing and permanence matter most. 
Identity, by contrast, could operate effectively with a more flexible system, streamlining blockchain use, reserving strict consensus for truly time-sensitive applications.