Sure, but one side can be substantiated.

The Satoshi protocol is not about money.

It is a distributed, trust-less consensus algorithm. Finance was just a good candidate to start with.

But we can expand that much further.

Some strange examples I hear about how this is silly:

"You can't have a smart contract act as an employer because it doesn't exist" But neither do companies? They're an abstraction that we agree exists, enforced by law.

It needs to be enforced by law because of the issue of trust.

But if I have a mechanism that removes trust (merkle trees) then what's the issue? The contract will do what it states it does because that's the only option it has.

Granted, it's a touch utopian and I'm not advocating for setting this system up tomorrow. But it's absolutely an achievable goal