I'm not here to argue whether a blockchain is a correct use case or not, that's why I specifically said in my parent comment I'm not interesting in arguing about that, and also said it again in my parent comment. There's always someone here that is looking to pick a fight about "you dont need a blockchain", and I'm not interested in having that discussion (mostly because I agree with it in this case)

But to your point that it's possible to hard fork, well, of course, computers being turing complete you can always go one level deeper into the platform and change the underlying system, but on a practical level forcing all of the miners to upgrade their software and coordinating this is a HUGE effort, and it seems like a very bad architectural decision to force an entire platform upgrade to deal with fraudulent users when safety can be built into the smart contracts themselves.

But I'm not arguing this centralisation is a good idea either, I'm merely pointing out that immutability isn't as final as the original post would make it seem, and there are ways of dealing with the problems they outlined (someone having fraudulently acquired tokens)