The faces are exceedingly like the uncanny early AI-generated smears.
London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
11–20 of 66 posts
Re: London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
#12I can't help but think it's a waste of money, how many paintings of Mary and ugly baby Jesus do you need?
I'm not downvoting you, because this is a common economic misconception, and I'm sure your opinion is shared by many. Money is never wasted. While the long explanation is some what technical and boring, the short version is this; "Money is neither created nor destroyed, it simply moves from one hand to another". Put another way, the National Gallery had 20 mil to spend. So they spent it. That 20 mil us now in the eco…
But this money won’t probably be spent further in any ”productive” way, they will be locked in some financial tools that will only help extracting funds from the real sector, which is what one probably really cares about when they say that “money should work”. It’s not similar to a government investment in building a bridge which, while it’s also spending state money, creates ripples of economic activity involving thousands of people and dozens of industries.
Re: London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
#13Ugh. It looks like an early AI hallucination produced while trying to generate religious art in the style of the Iron Maiden's Dance of Death album cover (possibly the ugliest album cover ever).
Re: London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not downvoting you, because this is a common economic misconception, and I'm sure your opinion is shared by many. Money is never wasted. While the long explanation is some what technical and boring, the short version is this; "Money is neither created nor destroyed, it simply moves from one hand to another". Put another way, the National Gallery had 20 mil to spend. So they spent it. That 20 mil us now in the eco…
But this money won’t probably be spent further in any ”productive” way, they will be locked in some financial tools that will only help extracting funds from the real sector, which is what one probably really cares about when they say that “money should work”. It’s not similar to a government investment in building a bridge which, while it’s also spending state money, creates ripples of economic activity involving th…
[deleted]
Re: London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
#15An important detail missing from the headline is that the painting has been dated to be from 1500-1510.
Yes, I thought it was a modern piece and already started thinking it was some kind of scam.
Re: London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
#16Ugh. It looks like an early AI hallucination produced while trying to generate religious art in the style of the Iron Maiden's Dance of Death album cover (possibly the ugliest album cover ever).
Re: London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not downvoting you, because this is a common economic misconception, and I'm sure your opinion is shared by many. Money is never wasted. While the long explanation is some what technical and boring, the short version is this; "Money is neither created nor destroyed, it simply moves from one hand to another". Put another way, the National Gallery had 20 mil to spend. So they spent it. That 20 mil us now in the eco…
But this money won’t probably be spent further in any ”productive” way, they will be locked in some financial tools that will only help extracting funds from the real sector, which is what one probably really cares about when they say that “money should work”. It’s not similar to a government investment in building a bridge which, while it’s also spending state money, creates ripples of economic activity involving th…
The seller now has 20 million to spend. The money just moved from A to B.
Re: London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
#18I can't help but think it's a waste of money, how many paintings of Mary and ugly baby Jesus do you need?
I'm not downvoting you, because this is a common economic misconception, and I'm sure your opinion is shared by many. Money is never wasted. While the long explanation is some what technical and boring, the short version is this; "Money is neither created nor destroyed, it simply moves from one hand to another". Put another way, the National Gallery had 20 mil to spend. So they spent it. That 20 mil us now in the eco…
Reminds me of a visit of a garden restaurant in Munich, back in the days. My friend ordered a soup, but got a beer. Pointing out the mistake to the waiter, he was told that it doesn't matter, because the price is the same.
Re: London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
#19It makes me sad that Londons fabulous (and free) galleries have warehouses full of masterpieces that they have no space to display, yet my local museum has a gallery with not a single decent painting. I wish more of those great works could be shared around.
Re: London's National Gallery buys mysterious altarpiece for $20m
#20An important detail missing from the headline is that the painting has been dated to be from 1500-1510.
[deleted]