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

11–20 of 404 posts

Re: John Cleese Sells the Brooklyn Bridge as an NFT

#11

Post by chartpath »

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…

Wasn't there an app on iOS way back at the start that was just an image of a ruby/gem of some kind that cost $999? Some people actually bought it before Apple took it off the App Store.

Re: John Cleese Sells the Brooklyn Bridge as an NFT

#14

Post by Someone »

chartpath wrote: post #11
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…

Wasn't there an app on iOS way back at the start that was just an image of a ruby/gem of some kind that cost $999? Some people actually bought it before Apple took it off the App Store.

$999.99 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_Rich)

Re: John Cleese Sells the Brooklyn Bridge as an NFT

#16

Post by vl »

BurningFrog wrote: post #13

Buying it from such a Legend is what gives it value. It's like Cleese is personally making fun of the buyer! I'm pretty sure this will go down as the Pet Rocks of this era. But... I'm not entirely sure.

He is only one of the very few people who can pull it off.

Re: John Cleese Sells the Brooklyn Bridge as an NFT

#18

Post by cs702 »

Please consider changing the OP link to Cleese's actual post on Twitter, which embeds a video of him describing this "work of art":

https://twitter.com/JohnCleese/status/1372944852325789704

It's brilliant parody, as usual, from Cleese. Regardless of what you think of NFTs, you will get a good laugh.

Re: John Cleese Sells the Brooklyn Bridge as an NFT

#19

Post by lukifer »

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…

Accelerating inequality has led to a conundrum for the rich in addition to the obvious consequences for the poor: what do you actually do with that obscene wealth? [0] You can only consume so much luxury, and sitting on dollars results in tax liability and/or gradual depreciation. Gambling it on speculative assets and bragging-rights positional goods (whynotboth.gif) is pretty much the only game in town, especially when everyone else is doing it, and you can tell yourself a Greater Sucker story (which may or may not resemble a game of Chicken / "Push Your Luck").

NFTs and crypto are obviously realms for this to play out, but this same force is at work for speculative investing in startups as well. For every startup with a value prop, a market, and a revenue model, there are a dozen who are flush with cash solely for the purpose of attracting Greater Suckers, fueled by the same motive to park and/or gamble an asset portfolio.

[0] https://hiddenforces.io/podcasts/karen-petrou-wealth-inequal...

Post reply on HN