Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views • Hacker News Board

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#11

Post by hippira » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 4:07 AM UTC

dionidium wrote: post #9

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #8

> They’re investments, not really meant for living in. They cast these huge shadows and block views—really change the skyline—just so they can stand empty. That is definitely one of the saddest parts for me. These billionaires (many of whom got their wealth in shady circumstances) are just using these condos to park their money. I may think NFTs are insane but at least when people with too much money park their wealt…

Counterpoint: these buildings are gorgeous and only enhance the city. Whenever I’m on 57th St I crane my neck to stare at them as I walk. Often, I’ll just stop for a while to look up in awe. They haven’t ruined anything. Moreover, even if you disagree about their beauty, so what? People should be free to build things — even things you don’t personally like!

Well you are free to do things but not at the cost of pollutions.

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#12

Post by practicalpants » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 4:09 AM UTC

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #8

> They’re investments, not really meant for living in. They cast these huge shadows and block views—really change the skyline—just so they can stand empty. That is definitely one of the saddest parts for me. These billionaires (many of whom got their wealth in shady circumstances) are just using these condos to park their money. I may think NFTs are insane but at least when people with too much money park their wealt…

Wealthy people minus a few eccentrics are most certainly not parking their money in NFTs. The crazy $69MM Beeple headline was actually a purchase by an NFT related company from what I understand.

Not withstanding unoccupied real estate investments are a problem in every major city. It's usually wealthy foreign investors living far away in particular...e.g. Russia -> London, China -> Singapore/Vancouver, etc. really seems like non-occupied real estate purchases by foreign capital ought to be restricted a bit legally

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#13

Post by HWR_14 » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 4:10 AM UTC

thepasswordis wrote: post #5

She showed up to look at houses she had no intention of buying? Groundbreaking.

By your definition, I could say about Newton's Principa Mathematica "He put some words on paper, groundbreaking" Or Linus "He put some bits on disk, groundbreaking"

If you don't think her book is interesting, that's fine. But treating the methodology of how she got access to take the pictures as her sole output is lazy.

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#14

Post by twelvechairs » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 4:11 AM UTC

practicalpants wrote: post #12

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #8

> They’re investments, not really meant for living in. They cast these huge shadows and block views—really change the skyline—just so they can stand empty. That is definitely one of the saddest parts for me. These billionaires (many of whom got their wealth in shady circumstances) are just using these condos to park their money. I may think NFTs are insane but at least when people with too much money park their wealt…

Wealthy people minus a few eccentrics are most certainly not parking their money in NFTs. The crazy $69MM Beeple headline was actually a purchase by an NFT related company from what I understand. Not withstanding unoccupied real estate investments are a problem in every major city. It's usually wealthy foreign investors living far away in particular...e.g. Russia -> London, China -> Singapore/Vancouver, etc. really s…

The simplest answer is land value tax

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#15

Post by Aunche » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 4:12 AM UTC

> But despite the breathtaking views, Schmied says the multi-million-dollar condos were dishearteningly dull

How many new apartments aren't dull? If you're spending $90 million on an apartment, the last thing you would want is for it to be in the style of some architect's avant-garde idea of beauty. If you want to add personality, you hire your own interior designers to find your own aesthetic.

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#16

Post by ampdepolymerase » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 4:13 AM UTC

At least she did not manage to convince herself that she really is a billionaire heiress and start raising funds to build art museums.

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#17

Post by HWR_14 » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 4:13 AM UTC

dionidium wrote: post #9

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #8

> They’re investments, not really meant for living in. They cast these huge shadows and block views—really change the skyline—just so they can stand empty. That is definitely one of the saddest parts for me. These billionaires (many of whom got their wealth in shady circumstances) are just using these condos to park their money. I may think NFTs are insane but at least when people with too much money park their wealt…

Counterpoint: these buildings are gorgeous and only enhance the city. Whenever I’m on 57th St I crane my neck to stare at them as I walk. Often, I’ll just stop for a while to look up in awe. They haven’t ruined anything. Moreover, even if you disagree about their beauty, so what? People should be free to build things — even things you don’t personally like!

If you think that the buildings are ugly and damage the city, you'd be opposed to them. You like them so are not.

As for "people should be free to build things", we decided over 100 years ago that wasn't the case. Not unrestrained by zoning laws and concern for the community.

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#18

Post by paxys » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 4:13 AM UTC

practicalpants wrote: post #12

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #8

> They’re investments, not really meant for living in. They cast these huge shadows and block views—really change the skyline—just so they can stand empty. That is definitely one of the saddest parts for me. These billionaires (many of whom got their wealth in shady circumstances) are just using these condos to park their money. I may think NFTs are insane but at least when people with too much money park their wealt…

Wealthy people minus a few eccentrics are most certainly not parking their money in NFTs. The crazy $69MM Beeple headline was actually a purchase by an NFT related company from what I understand. Not withstanding unoccupied real estate investments are a problem in every major city. It's usually wealthy foreign investors living far away in particular...e.g. Russia -> London, China -> Singapore/Vancouver, etc. really s…

While not good for the local housing market for sure, the country does gain from a ton of foreign illicit income being converted to its own currency and an easily seizable asset conveniently parked within its borders.

Cities and counties can also implement vacancy taxes and such to somewhat lessen this problem.

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#19

Post by bawolff » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 4:14 AM UTC

HWR_14 wrote: post #13

thepasswordis wrote: post #5

She showed up to look at houses she had no intention of buying? Groundbreaking.

By your definition, I could say about Newton's Principa Mathematica "He put some words on paper, groundbreaking" Or Linus "He put some bits on disk, groundbreaking" If you don't think her book is interesting, that's fine. But treating the methodology of how she got access to take the pictures as her sole output is lazy.

And if someone wrote an article about linus with that headline, i would call the article stupid too.

Re: Artist faked being a billionaire to photograph New York City’s best views

#20

Post by oh_sigh » Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 4:14 AM UTC

HWR_14 wrote: post #13

thepasswordis wrote: post #5

She showed up to look at houses she had no intention of buying? Groundbreaking.

By your definition, I could say about Newton's Principa Mathematica "He put some words on paper, groundbreaking" Or Linus "He put some bits on disk, groundbreaking" If you don't think her book is interesting, that's fine. But treating the methodology of how she got access to take the pictures as her sole output is lazy.

What was her methodology?

> To pass as a convincing buyer, Schmied enlisted an antiquarian friend in Budapest to serve as her “husband,” and invented a 21-month-old baby, a personal chef, and a personal assistant named "Coco." She also blew the entire allowance from her residency at Dumbo’s Triangle Arts Association on manicures, makeup and clothes.

Oh, but right...literally none of that was necessary:

>...Surprisingly, none of the brokers asked for a credit check or proof of net worth. “I think at that level, they don’t bother with financial information,” she explains.