Some people think it's a good idea to have a distributed, immutable ledger for stuff like this, with the ability to make payments without depending on a handful of individual corporations like Paypal and Visa. The fact that it's "blockchain" is immaterial except that blockchain happens to be the technology that makes it possible.

There's so much knee-jerk opposition to "blockchain" stuff just because some nerds get too excited about it (and some people are trying to get rich off it). It makes no sense to me.

> Some people think it's a good idea to have a distributed, immutable ledger for stuff like this

Ok, still - what's the benefit of that in the discussed context (donations to an organisation preserving wildlife) which they can't easily provide with existing programs?

(Accepting the payment is slightly unrelated - if they want donations via cryptocoins, there's a bunch of payment gateways they can enable today)

It's not an improvement, it's feature parity.

Exactly, but you have to go with the tech latest fad as many here seem stakeholders in it. Once you are invested, you can’t criticize in the same way. It’s castles in the sky to me. It has “bubble” written all over it. There is little in NFC or Bitcoin-like technologies that I see as a great benefit to the human species. Love to be proven wrong with good comments of what that specific tech can do for humanity.