I.e. an NFT that for some arbitrary reason purports to represent ownership of some property in reality does not, in any meaningful, verifiable way. In other news, bears shit in the woods.
You do realise this is about an exploit in GitHub, right?
Yes, with a whole paragraph dedicated to explaining the exploit, and the rest of the article to promote some shitty NFT product and the utter falsehood that "The 1st commit of git/git no longer belongs to Linus Torvalds"