Extend the idea of NFTs to actual registered ownership of a thing you care about, like the title of your house, or your rental agreement, rather than a fucking pixelated jpg a child would be ashamed of, and it might look like something a bit more representative of a worthwhile future.
What happens when the chain devotes from reality? Let’s take the house title. I stop paying but refuse to sign a transaction giving up ownership. I get a divorce and destroy the key out of spite. I sell the house but have lost the key, can I never transact with my property again?
The chain will drift from reality, in an uncorrectable way, reducing its usefulness over time.
This is the ultimate example of where you want a centralised database run by the state. Preferably properly "cadastral", so you can drop a coordinate pin anywhere and look up the owner.
The house of cards you are standing on doesn't seem to pass the "is it worth something to people who don't already have skin in the game?" contrary to the title of a house.
Beanie babies aren't worth much now.
To their credit, Beanie Babies holders were always upfront about their desire to make money. There was none of this fig leaf reasoning about how BBs are really a harbinger of a new paradigm of asset securitization.
I think this isn't quite as implementable as they say it is. If someone breaks into a house, steals the crypto phrase from a little old lady, and moves a house into his name/address, should he really own it?
If a Blockchain contract needs to be ratified by an external entity, is the Blockchain really worth it over a database owned by that external entity?