Pairing nfts with reality makes sense if ownership can be enforced by sole fact of having an ownership, ie: 1. for things that live in digital world (easy), or

Pairing nfts with reality makes sense if ownership can be enforced by sole fact of having an ownership, ie: 1. for things that live in digital world (easy), or 2. weaker but probably acceptable in some cases - if physical good would be painted/printed on/made out of material containing ie. fingerprinted nanoparticles that match nft or has some unique chip that cannot be detached/duplicated – is as difficult to forge and as easy to verify as paper money 3. all ownership transfers would be verified by centralised (or whatever) system ie. government official confirming that digital and physical transfer happened correctly or ie. amazon/ebay would hold temporary custody of both digital/physical as intermediary in ownership transfer …otherwise pairing with reality looks like “lets have this cryptographically secure thing and pretend that it means X” – if this “pretend” part can be removed or minimised to be close to zero, then it starts making more sense, without it it’s just nothing more than cargo cult like “let’s pretend” arrangement.