Skim, read comments, and for things I want to remember, add them to an appropriate Are.na channel.
For longer articles I want to read eventually but know I won't get to for a long time, I use the "Save this page" feature of Inoreader[2].
Since I've started using Inoreader, I haven't gone back to any of these articles, but I'm ok with this – I tend to review the cache every 6-months to a year when I happen to have uninterrupted free time (like between jobs or on vacation). Previously I had Are.na channels called "To Read 1", "To Read 2", and so on.
[1] https://are.na
Consensus in that design is:
1. Perhaps the single most expensive consensus algorithm ever designed.
2. Deliberately one of the slowest.
3. Does not actually provide trustless consensus once 1/3 of the miner nodes decide to collude.
Other than "our data is a merkle tree but you have to trust us to submit transactions to it", and "a currency system with a failed promise to deliver either scale or trustless consensus" what, is the proper application?
I won't speak for what "blockchain" can or will become, but you might see the hype more clearly by considering the ideology inherent in asking specifically for the "proper application." You imply that you or someone in a position you understand might "apply blockchain" to a "problem," as you commonly understand it.
I see "blockchain" more as a movement, which completely evades "application" in the common sense. People building these technologies, and organizations around them, live in a separate world that makes little reference to the broader world of which most of us are a part. They start with distinct priors, which rule out most existing solutions on the grounds that they demand political centralization (see: https://medium.com/@VitalikButerin/the-meaning-of-decentrali...).
You can summarize this ideology as: 'if there's a sysadmin, the system is broken.'
It may very well be the case that they are creating a new world that will be marginalized and outcompeted by incumbent systems and organizations, but that's how I understand what's 'actually going on'.