> Yeah, that's how most things work in the physical world. If you want to secure a widget, then you need to "secure a physical object that grants irrevocable ownership" of it.

You can’t steal my house by obtaining the deed. You can’t steal my stock by obtaining the stock certificates. That’s not how it works. The vast majority of wealth in developed countries doesn’t rely on physical security to maintain ownership. We’ve collectively outsourced that function to the government and other institutions, so we don’t have to individually hire bodyguards to prevent criminals from taking possession of our homes and stealing our assets.

Most people only hold a relatively small amount of wealth in forms that can by physically stolen (eg. petty cash, electronics). This means that you only need to defend yourself against a $1000 crime (stealing your TV), which is a lot easier than defending against a $1M crime (stealing your house or 401k).

If crypto requires holding my wealth in a hardware wallet that can be stolen, that means I’m only going to be willing to invest the amount of wealth I would spend on a TV, not the kind of wealth I am going to allocate to stocks or bonds.

Granted, crypto has utility for people who can’t use the government-backed institutions, like criminals. And in some countries where the government will steal your money, it has broader appeal. I won’t argue with that.