Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

John Cleese Sells the Brooklyn Bridge as an NFT

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 404 posts

Re: John Cleese Sells the Brooklyn Bridge as an NFT

#3

Post by systemvoltage »

Apocryphon wrote: post #2

That’s a hip target to skewer for such an elder humorist.

Dada of NFTs, the future is going to call this Cleese’s bridge for NFTs as we call Duchamp’s urinal. It will probably sell, that’s why he didn’t just tell us the joke but also listed it.

Re: John Cleese Sells the Brooklyn Bridge as an NFT

#5

Post by bellyfullofbac »

systemvoltage wrote: post #3
Apocryphon wrote: post #2

That’s a hip target to skewer for such an elder humorist.

Dada of NFTs, the future is going to call this Cleese’s bridge for NFTs as we call Duchamp’s urinal. It will probably sell, that’s why he didn’t just tell us the joke but also listed it.

I don't really see the downside (oh yeah, planet's burning, but as the dog in the cartoon said, this is fine), if some rich jerkoffs buy it then Cleese can put the money into charity. I suppose one downside is that the NFT ponzi peddlers can now say "See, we're legitimate, even the founder of Monty Python is here!", but Cleese's comments about terminal insanity isn't exactly support.

I suppose everyone knows the emperors are naked, but hey, it seems like that's not stopping megabucks being made, and why should you miss out?

Re: John Cleese Sells the Brooklyn Bridge as an NFT

#7

Post by eloff »

Is it just me, or NFTs is just useless bragging rights about ownership of digital goods which can't be owned? You can make unlimited indistinguishable copies of an image. Do people really care who pretends to own it?

I mean I guess if you look at show of brands like Luis Vuiton (sp?) There are plenty of people willing to pay for said bragging rights.

As someone who's always mocked those brands and the people who buy them, it seems so strange to me though.

Re: John Cleese Sells the Brooklyn Bridge as an NFT

#9

Post by scambier »

eloff wrote: post #7

Is it just me, or NFTs is just useless bragging rights about ownership of digital goods which can't be owned? You can make unlimited indistinguishable copies of an image. Do people really care who pretends to own it? I mean I guess if you look at show of brands like Luis Vuiton (sp?) There are plenty of people willing to pay for said bragging rights. As someone who's always mocked those brands and the people who buy…

> Do people really care who pretends to own it

They absolutely don't. There's no art collectors or amateurs in this game, only speculators.

Post reply on HN