261–270 of 404 posts
There are children going hungry at school, people with trivial to fix but prohibitively expensive medical issues, and silicon valley millionaires are spending more than many will make in a year by purchasing bullshit. Shit's on fire, yo.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree, but this is a common objection which is worth addressing. Specifically I disagree that NFTs are grounded in that particular conceptual framework. NFTs aren't attempting to be bearer instruments which convey ownership of some physical good, or even of a piece of intellectual property. Those require a corresponding Ricardian contract. This remains a good idea, but, to put it mildly, there are unsolved probl…
> A NFT is just a baseball card It's more like a pointer to a JPEG of a baseball card.
Personally, I don't care for baseball cards, I value them about as much as the paper they're printed on. But collectors like them, so if I found one (I dunno, dropped in its sleeve into a tip jar?), I'd check if someone else wanted to pay for it before I started using it as a bookmark.
Same deal with NFTs. The difference is they're brand-new and white-hot, and it remains to be seen if they have enduring value.
My guess: NFTs will continue to be valued, but the vast majority of those which exist right now (and of every NFT ever minted) will be worth so little that it isn't worth the transaction fee to transfer ownership.
The John Cleese Brooklyn Bridge though? It's a great joke! Might not be worth whatever it goes for down the road, but it will probably still be worth something.
There are children going hungry at school, people with trivial to fix but prohibitively expensive medical issues, and silicon valley millionaires are spending more than many will make in a year by purchasing bullshit. Shit's on fire, yo.
NFTs are a mechanism for transferring money from rich people to artists who are not rich. Isn't this something you should support, given your stated beliefs?
You should consider an NFT to be something like a certificate. Some entity has issued you a certificate saying, e.g. you are the rightful owner of the Brooklyn Bridge. The value of certificates in NFT form is that they are difficult to forge and easy to verify. However, like a paper certificate that you might hang on your wall, the actual certificate is worthless. It is representative of something that may have value…
He isn’t actually selling the Brooklyn Bridge, but a (comically poor) drawing of the Brooklyn Bridge: https://opensea.io/assets/0x9201a886740d193e315f1f1b2b193321... So this is not really a scam, but rather a legitimate satire of recent NFT sales.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think there is a flaw in your reasoning but it's hard to be sure because your last sentence is rather hard to parse. > They are missing 99% of the reasons things have value, Can you clarify? > they cannot understand two seemingly identical things having widely different values. We're not talking about the value in a piece of art - or even the value of owning an original piece of art. Ownership itself is a social co…
You cannot "authenticate" the bits 001 are different from the bits 001. NFTs claim one is the "original".
Sentence 1 is trivially true. Sentence 2 differs from my understanding but more importantly - I don't see how it connects to our previous discussion.
There are children going hungry at school, people with trivial to fix but prohibitively expensive medical issues, and silicon valley millionaires are spending more than many will make in a year by purchasing bullshit. Shit's on fire, yo.
NFTs are a mechanism for transferring money from rich people to artists who are not rich. Isn't this something you should support, given your stated beliefs?
I have not looked closely into NFTs, but I have severe doubts that starving artists are, or are going to be the actual beneficiaries of money sloshing through that system.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This NFT is not "The Brooklyn Bridge", this NFT is "Remember when John Cleese sold the Brooklyn Bridge NFT". Do you think nobody wants the bragging rights of owning that? I certainly do, but not for $50k, which it already has.
I suppose one can “brag” about most anything. Seems to me, though, that a brag about “owning” an arbitrary sequence of bytes is pretty damn empty. Overcome a challenge that presses your personal limitations? Worthy of a brag: you took up the task, persevered, and conquered. Open your wallet to purchase something? I just don’t see that there’s any legitimate boasting to be had there: any damn fool with the same money…
The item isn’t the brag. The purchase is. People don’t buy Rolxes because because it doesn’t anything radically different than a $50 watch. They buy it because it tells people they have money. That’s what art is. That’s what NFT is.
https://opensea.io/assets/0x495f947276749ce646f68ac8c2484200...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. There’s little I’d like less than bragging about having spent my life savings on a JPEG that everyone has but that I “own”...
I don't think the person spending $50k does it with his lifes saving. You don't buy a jpeg, you buy the unique item that John Cleese sold. Same for movie props. You can buy a nice lightsaber below $200. The ones that were used in the movies... a bit more.
A NFT is not an item.
> Same for movie props. You can buy a nice lightsaber below $200. The ones that were used in the movies... a bit more.
Those are things. There is no correlation. NFT is selling you a pointer. It's a hash that on one software platform says "that thing over there". When Bob buys a NFT, he isn't buying a lightsaber that he can display, loan out, or hold . Bob is buying a number.