The land registry argument is the best example of this fallacy
>the regulatory authority can make its own record and thus rewrite yours, which means that blockchain doesn’t work.
No, the value is precisely the fact that it's the regulatory authority that forcibly changes ownership, and not you. Deed fraud [1] is a serious issue. Blockchain would protect against it completely: forging a signature or a will would be impossible. Rather than a document of dubious provenance, the will's hash would be stored along with the property record. Very likely in many cases of deed fraud the clerk changing the registry knows it's fraudulent and changes it for financial gain. That would become impossible also.
The only way to forcibly take the property would be a provide a cryptographically signed court order.
That's only for the security side of things. Tokenized real estate would make things that are currently very hard to do trivial, like using 1% of your home in country A as collateral for a rented car in country B. It's theoretically possible right now, but arranging that would require so much effort nobody does it. With a house record on the blockchain you would first tokenize it (transfer the ownership to a smart contract with tokens) and then transfer 1% of tokens to a car rental smart contract.
Same for every kind of possession. Own google stock and want to use it as collateral for X? Why not. Want to sell 1% of your rental property to an investor in another country? Easy, no paperwork needed.
Maybe it's never going to happen, but I think it's going to. The blockchain revolution would do to finance what internet did to information. Everything that's being done online was technically possible before it - theoretically, I could have written this exact post and physically mailed it to everyone who's ever going to read it.
[1] https://www.lifelock.com/learn-fraud-deed-fraud-losing-your-...