51–60 of 268 posts
An acquaintance of mine made 15k euros in 6 days with auto-generated artworks, he even made it to the local newspaper. I don't even know why I bother learning new frameworks and languages anymore.
Is your friend making that money on a regular basis? Or just once during a market mania?
Ironic coming from a website like fstoppers. What exactly is the "value" of fine art photography ? Why do people pay exorbitant amounts for basically a few hours of photos during their wedding, given that a wedding might end up divorce ? People pay for whatever has "intrinsic" value to them. If Digitally generated/cryptographic art is it, so be it.
Not at all clear that's true with much NFT.
It's stupid at face value. No pyramid required. You cannot intrinsically link real world items to tokens. The source of truth is the real world, not the token. Add an unlimited supply of unique things, and how could anyone expect to make money from this?
NFTs are not meant for physical items, they’re digital certificates. People literally burnt a Banksy painting before auctioning its NFT.
Since there’s nothing to own or even point to, what’s stopping a second party from claiming they actually have the original Banksy NFT and selling their own? Just the time stamps on the blockchain?
What a miserable destruction of real art to profit on a trading frenzy.
But with NFT.... You don't have to spend any money at all. You can just download the item. Why would you pay any money at all. If Van Gough painted two "starry night" painting and sold the 1st for $10MM but offered me the 2nd one for free, I'd take the free one. Why would anyone pay money for something that you can get for free?
I think its because we're in a time of massive inflation of assets, probably brought on my the Fed's policies. We've inflated housing with low interest rates, stocks with QE and salaries for the lucky few in certain industries have risen much faster than the rest. This has lead to a group of people with excess cash chasing return. Once all the low hanging fruit has become out of reach in terms of value (ie: TLSA), money is seeking any other place to get returns - Crypto, penny stocks, SPAC's and now NFTs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
NFTs are not meant for physical items, they’re digital certificates. People literally burnt a Banksy painting before auctioning its NFT.
So they not only destroyed art, but also wasted energy on creating the NFT, adding to global warming. If there's anything that's not absolute evil in all that, I fail to see it.
If people want to expend their own resources on NFTs, that's entirely their right to do so, and calling it evil because the process consumed energy is absurd.
If you have a problem with CO2 emission, by all means advocate for laws requiring energy production to not emit CO2 as a by-product. But to single out some non-essential activity that you personally don't like because of the imagined motives of those behind it, while ignoring every other non-essential activity that uses energy, is disingenuous and irresponsible.
Consider this: We have 2 generations who are digital native. They have digital relationships. They buy digital. They consume digital. The missing part has been to earn and spend digital.
No that digital natives have been handed $$$ in govt handouts which has caused an explosion of economic activity in crypto.
Now they can and will speculate in markets with digital. And do it with provable scarcity
They are discovering scarcity
It's stupid at face value. No pyramid required. You cannot intrinsically link real world items to tokens. The source of truth is the real world, not the token. Add an unlimited supply of unique things, and how could anyone expect to make money from this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That belief is incorrect, but extremely common, so it's dubious to describe it as weird. Indeed, the fact that so many people hold that belief is at the root of the whole NFT situation.
Can you explain the correct version from your perspective? It doesn’t clarify anything if you just declare someone else incorrect but won’t say why.
As far as I know, the inventors of NFTs do not claim that they do. But it seems like a lot of people talking about and perhaps buying NFTs don't understand that.
I wrote my first Fortran program in 1969. I have been active in the field of computing since then, both as an academic and as a programmer in industry. During this time, there have been several times when I first heard about something new, something potentially game changing. I remember some of them very clearly: 1. Around 1971: a Wang desktop computer. Imagine: a computer that fit on a desk! 2. Visicalc (spreadsheet…
What is the primary point for which you believe NFTs to be rubbish?
It's stupid at face value. No pyramid required. You cannot intrinsically link real world items to tokens. The source of truth is the real world, not the token. Add an unlimited supply of unique things, and how could anyone expect to make money from this?
>You cannot intrinsically link real world items to tokens. Patents & trademarks?
And there are rules about how the trademarks/patents from one country applies in other countries. (IIRC you must fill some paperwork in every country, but copyright is similar and easier to extend globally.)
Anyway, everyone can create a new chain of NFT, so the same object can be NFTed in many blockchains. Specially because some NFT implementations don't even ask if you are the creator of the digital object.