Wise people say to never put into crypto, what you can't stand to lose.
Are you saying, that people will start "betting" their homes and cars? And depend on the security of their web browser? You're crazy.
I'm not saying that. All I said is, any time physical NFTs are brought up: people like to use cars and homes knowing they are a poor example. Kind of like people bring up cars in every gun discussion.
It's the same exact risk as already holding Bitcoin and other cryptos. Nothing changes there. NFTs aren't inherently more risky. There will always be the risk of your Metamask getting hacked. So don't use Metamask. Use a hardware wallet that you can route through Metamask instead.
People are also looking into how you can insure and/or personally register your NFTs as well. But stuff like that may come at the cost of privacy. Additionally, cars and homes are near zero exchange volume items and thus don't really have a need to be ever be tokenized. They're a poor example of what could benefit from tokenization for that among other reasons. Vintage pristine cars on the other hand that you don't necessarily want to physically move around... may have a case. Because those are more like a collectibles that can be expected to appreciate in value. And stuff like that gets fractionalized? You've now got new investment asset classes.
Masterworks already does this with artwork. But Ethereum and other blockchains unlock the boundaries of where the ownership can go, and how it can be exchanged, and that it can be verified by all parties, thanks to the NFT. It doesn't have to be done on a blockchain, but it will be because the royalties gold mine is too opportunistic.
Physical collectibles are likely to be the first big "physicals NFT market". I threw vintage cars in that class to poke fun at anyone brining up cars and homes any time "physical NFTs" are mentioned. And I also think it'd be really cool to "invest" in a fraction of one via a NFT.
If the use case is actually profitable for token issuers (and I think it will be), there will be a quick tipping point with physicals collectibles, and then it will become the new norm. The only dystopian part I foresee of this is that if you actually want physical possession of a collectible you may feel some attachment to - it might be very difficult to pull off after this new norm because tokenizers will be after the supply of everything authenticatable. Because what Masterworks did the price of artwork can be speculated to happen for almost any fractionalized collectible asset when you increase that collectible's market outreach by a factor of 10,000 or even more. So a result, then alongside of USDC and other real stablecoins, we'll have our first huge class(es) of "tangible assets" residing on blockchains.
And then alongside of elevated magic crypto money prices, everyone will be complaining that people are spending way too much money on useless fractionalized physical collectibles they can't do anything with (except not all will be fractionalized, and many will be functionally redeemable). But only after I'm predicting this will happen: as they sit here reading this, and will miss the boat again continuing their same anti-crypto arguments in 2028 that they started in 2014. And I'll be there trying to explain the next big use case falling on more deaf/ignorant ears (not you specifically, but people in general). Since I'm just a Crypto Bro. Like that other one over there telling everyone to buy Shiba Butt Coin.