Live data from Hacker News

An Andy Warhol Artwork Was Stolen and Never Seen Again

thedailybeast.com

21–28 of 28 posts

Re: An Andy Warhol Artwork Was Stolen and Never Seen Again

#21
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read somewhere that stolen works of art are used as a form of currency between drug crime Organisations

Doesn't make a ton of sense. If you can't convert it to currency easily, why does it have value at all?

The whole point of currency is that it doesn't have to have value at all. You use it for goods and services. Money doesn't have value, it's just a piece of paper, bitcoin is just bunch of bytes in a linux server. This is also why people used use gold as currency; it's not that gold is a very practically valuable metal (say, unlike iron) but it was the currency mostly because it wasn't too common, but also not rare enough to make it impractical to use for goods and services.

Re: An Andy Warhol Artwork Was Stolen and Never Seen Again

#22
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't make a ton of sense. If you can't convert it to currency easily, why does it have value at all?

If it is the currency, why would it need to be convertible to another currency?

Give me change for a Rembrandt.

Re: An Andy Warhol Artwork Was Stolen and Never Seen Again

#23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On a national basis, the top 1% in the US don't have enough money to finance bespoke art heists (nor can they generally afford black market museum pieces). So it's probably not them :)...maybe the top 0.1% or 0.01% could. Whenever I think about this particular topic, I come to the conclusion that there must be much more nuance to it. I assume the pieces are eventually sold outside of the United States, maybe to oliga…

Do you realize that the top .1% is also part of the top 1%?

The top 0.1% is also part of the top 99%, but saying that only the top 99% can afford to finance bespoke art thefts is meaningless.

Re: An Andy Warhol Artwork Was Stolen and Never Seen Again

#24
post #7

Good thing they are junk. It'd be terrible if it was a talented artist's work.

Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to Hacker News?

dang, the fun police has arrived!

dang, the fun police, has arrived!

( one comma, but both are equally applicable! :^) )

Re: An Andy Warhol Artwork Was Stolen and Never Seen Again

#26
post #2

What I find pretty amazing about this theft and the theft from the Isabella Stewart Gardner museum in Boston is that the pieces stolen can't be resold on the open market. Whomever is paying for these thefts, can only sell to discreet private buyers (who then can't display them openly without risking being caught). The economics of it are fascinating. A collector is paying someone to steal artwork, which then becomes…

From what I've heard, the easiest way of turning a stolen painting into cash is by, in effect, selling it back to its legitimate owner. You do this by using a trusted agent who collects a "reward" for helping to recover the painting, but in a manner that does not reveal who stole it in the first place. It's not easy and it can go wrong, of course, but it's presumably easier than finding a real-life James-Bond-villain to buy it from you.

Re: An Andy Warhol Artwork Was Stolen and Never Seen Again

#27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only if you do as well. Also, I don't think that word means what you think it means. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/unsubstantive

From the link you gave: substantive adjective 7. of considerable amount or quantity. 8. possessing substance; having practical importance, value, or effect I bet that's what dang had in mind about your comment.

Which none of dang's comments have. Dang is a mod who breaks the rules every day and calls people out on them. This is fair to you?

Re: An Andy Warhol Artwork Was Stolen and Never Seen Again

#28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the link you gave: substantive adjective 7. of considerable amount or quantity. 8. possessing substance; having practical importance, value, or effect I bet that's what dang had in mind about your comment.

Which none of dang's comments have. Dang is a mod who breaks the rules every day and calls people out on them. This is fair to you?

That's true, but it seems to be unavoidable.

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17494243

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16080800

https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...

Post reply on HN