If there is a benefit in using blockchain to track pork chops, and if all the pork chop companies know and kinda-trust each other already, a private blockchain could keep the hackers out and implement various security schemes, and maybe even have a board that could publicly organize a rollback to undo a "DAO-hack". (As seen with Ethereum, such a "board" exists implicitly anyway even in a public blockchain system).
But do you enjoy reading something like this [1]? Can you analyze blockchain code like that? Ideally before you know that there's a bug?
It's on Ethereum to show how to make things secure. The general level of software buggyness is inacceptable if you say "code is law".
[1] http://hackingdistributed.com/2016/06/18/analysis-of-the-dao...
1- The main advantage over something like Paxos or Raft is simplicity. There are also serious disadvantages, and normally I would still suggest grabbing a library that does Paxos or Raft instead of something blockchain-based. Still, it's not "no advantage".
You're right, from a technology point of view. But for this system to run, you need to convince a lot of people, from different cultures/backgrounds, to use it.
Maybe talking about the safety of the bitcoin network instead of a mathematical proof makes that marketing challenge easier ?
Take for instance the options contract market. Let's say you have a pool of 50 trusted brokerages and financial institutions that rapidly trade these contracts. The current solution is each entity has their own custom, internal tracking system along with either a centralized service that they all communicate with, or inter-party connections. In either case, this is fragile, highly expensive to build and maintain and is often slow.
The blockchain isn't a miracle technology like these articles portray it as, and IBM, JP Morgan, et al don't see it that way anyway. It is a convenience tool for a more robust ledger that will lower costs for trusted inter-party transactions.