Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610 • Hacker News Board

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#21

Post by knodi » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 12:56 PM UTC

seibelj wrote: post #19

Traster wrote: post #15

Well, congratulations to those NFT scammers, it finally paid off. They got their Whale. The entire game of pumping up NFTs to try and pass them off as a useful tool that'll see widespread adoption has finally paid out. This is a small sum of money for Visa to throw away, but this creates a fantastic permission structure for unsophisticated investors to throw away their life savings on a set of worthless e-certificate…

Bitcoin crossed 50k (again), US senators are debating cryptocurrency regulation as part of historical legislation, and major global companies like Visa are making moves in the space. Is it possible the HN decade-long dismissal of crypto and blockchain has been totally wrong? Or is HN just a tiny minority of people who are simply smarter and wiser than the US government, Fortune 100 corporations, and hundreds of milli…

Or the Fortune 100 corporations want to profit of the millions of people who own crypto and want to own crypto.

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#22

Post by notanzaiiswear » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 12:56 PM UTC

hanklazard wrote: post #2

I find their explanation so strange… they are adding it to their “collection of historic commerce artifacts”? Do they run a financial network or a museum? If I were a shareholder, I would not be happy with this move.

Lots of companies seem to spend money on non-business related things, so there seem to be some provisions for that in the usual shareholder agreements?

Many art exhibitions seem to be sponsored by financial institutions, for example.

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#23

Post by disruptthelaw » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 12:57 PM UTC

disruptthelaw wrote: post #20

seibelj wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin crossed 50k (again), US senators are debating cryptocurrency regulation as part of historical legislation, and major global companies like Visa are making moves in the space. Is it possible the HN decade-long dismissal of crypto and blockchain has been totally wrong? Or is HN just a tiny minority of people who are simply smarter and wiser than the US government, Fortune 100 corporations, and hundreds of milli…

I’m genuinely agnostic on your question, either of those possibilities strike me as roughly equally plausible.

Also, many of those debating and getting their toes wet in crypto are not necessarily predicting it will work, they’re just hedging their bets in case it does. For example I’ve got about 3% of my Investible wealth in crypto. If it tanks to zero I wouldn’t consider myself “wrong”.

Crypto skepticism is still a fairly mainstream position, it’s not unique to HN.

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#24

Post by rattlesnakedave » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 12:59 PM UTC

Traster wrote: post #15

Well, congratulations to those NFT scammers, it finally paid off. They got their Whale. The entire game of pumping up NFTs to try and pass them off as a useful tool that'll see widespread adoption has finally paid out. This is a small sum of money for Visa to throw away, but this creates a fantastic permission structure for unsophisticated investors to throw away their life savings on a set of worthless e-certificate…

Not only is this a small sum of money for Visa to throw away, this is a small sum of money for an NFT collector to throw away.

To me most criticism of NFTs is reminiscent of criticisms of modern art. Very few understand the scope of what "non fungible token" means. There are PLENTY of use-cases for a publicly verifiable token issued by a 3rd party and owned by you, other than art, if you just use a little imagination.

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#25

Post by jacobedawson » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 1:02 PM UTC

Traster wrote: post #15

Well, congratulations to those NFT scammers, it finally paid off. They got their Whale. The entire game of pumping up NFTs to try and pass them off as a useful tool that'll see widespread adoption has finally paid out. This is a small sum of money for Visa to throw away, but this creates a fantastic permission structure for unsophisticated investors to throw away their life savings on a set of worthless e-certificate…

This comment applies if you think that art itself is a scam, or that art needs to have "use" outside of perceived financial, social & aesthetic value.

HN does tend to be especially bitter towards Crypto, something that I think will fade with time as it blends into culture without seeming like some "charlatan intruder from elsewhere".

I tend to think the rise of NFT markets represents an inflection point that will only be obvious when we connect the dots looking backwards. Plenty of people reviled Duchamp.

P.s. Please let me know where I can purchase an Alpha-Centauri real-estate NFT

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#26

Post by gokhan » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 1:02 PM UTC

garbagetime wrote: post #17

gokhan wrote: post #14

Somewhere, a CryptoKitties owner is crying. Andy Warhol's Marilyn artwork isn't anything interesting for me, but it's clearly represents a point in art history. I can't value NFT's as long as they're digital only, non-fungibility does not create value all by itself IMO, but I understand the historical aspects of a CryptoPunk. So Visa is the first to do it in corporate world and that's a thing, but anyone following wo…

It seems strange to state in one paragraph both that (a) art can have value simply because it represents a point in art history and that (b) NFTs can't hold value as long as they're digital-only. Because, there's nothing about being digital-only which makes it so that they cannot represent a point in art history.

Would you go to Louvre to see Mona Lisa if you have an atom-by-atom identical copy at home? How much would you pay for the original? What is "original" in this case? Which ship of Theseus is the original one?

I don't say, as art, some NFTs are not pretty. I just say they don't represent the same value (for me) as some people think. A CryptoPunk does not have a physical representation, so the one you and I see on our screens are both the same, the original one. I can already see the original whenever I want by just visiting Visa's tweet.

A CryptoPunk, especially the one Visa bought, clearly is history. But that does not apply to other NFTs, others are ordinary JPEGs.

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#27

Post by manigandham » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 1:03 PM UTC

rattlesnakedave wrote: post #24

Traster wrote: post #15

Well, congratulations to those NFT scammers, it finally paid off. They got their Whale. The entire game of pumping up NFTs to try and pass them off as a useful tool that'll see widespread adoption has finally paid out. This is a small sum of money for Visa to throw away, but this creates a fantastic permission structure for unsophisticated investors to throw away their life savings on a set of worthless e-certificate…

Not only is this a small sum of money for Visa to throw away, this is a small sum of money for an NFT collector to throw away. To me most criticism of NFTs is reminiscent of criticisms of modern art. Very few understand the scope of what "non fungible token" means. There are PLENTY of use-cases for a publicly verifiable token issued by a 3rd party and owned by you, other than art, if you just use a little imagination…

We already have (digital) ownership that can be publically verified.

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#28

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 1:03 PM UTC

Traster wrote: post #15

Well, congratulations to those NFT scammers, it finally paid off. They got their Whale. The entire game of pumping up NFTs to try and pass them off as a useful tool that'll see widespread adoption has finally paid out. This is a small sum of money for Visa to throw away, but this creates a fantastic permission structure for unsophisticated investors to throw away their life savings on a set of worthless e-certificate…

[deleted]

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#29

Post by the_gastropod » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 1:04 PM UTC

rattlesnakedave wrote: post #24

Traster wrote: post #15

Well, congratulations to those NFT scammers, it finally paid off. They got their Whale. The entire game of pumping up NFTs to try and pass them off as a useful tool that'll see widespread adoption has finally paid out. This is a small sum of money for Visa to throw away, but this creates a fantastic permission structure for unsophisticated investors to throw away their life savings on a set of worthless e-certificate…

Not only is this a small sum of money for Visa to throw away, this is a small sum of money for an NFT collector to throw away. To me most criticism of NFTs is reminiscent of criticisms of modern art. Very few understand the scope of what "non fungible token" means. There are PLENTY of use-cases for a publicly verifiable token issued by a 3rd party and owned by you, other than art, if you just use a little imagination…

Mind sharing just one?

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#30

Post by moolcool » Mon, Aug 23, 2021, 1:04 PM UTC

garbagetime wrote: post #17

gokhan wrote: post #14

Somewhere, a CryptoKitties owner is crying. Andy Warhol's Marilyn artwork isn't anything interesting for me, but it's clearly represents a point in art history. I can't value NFT's as long as they're digital only, non-fungibility does not create value all by itself IMO, but I understand the historical aspects of a CryptoPunk. So Visa is the first to do it in corporate world and that's a thing, but anyone following wo…

It seems strange to state in one paragraph both that (a) art can have value simply because it represents a point in art history and that (b) NFTs can't hold value as long as they're digital-only. Because, there's nothing about being digital-only which makes it so that they cannot represent a point in art history.

From what I've seen though, notable works have only gained notoriety _because_ they're NFTs. Beyond that, CryptoPunks/CrytpoKitties aren't really artistically interesting at all.