This alone makes me really uncomfortable because then what the hell are you paying for? On the one hand it's a way to give an artist more money directly, sure,

This alone makes me really uncomfortable because then what the hell are you paying for? On the one hand it's a way to give an artist more money directly, sure, and tie it to the specific work. But you could just do that publicly or anonymously anyway. On the other hand it seems entirely performative, in that it only servers to signal to wealthy peers (in this case, crypto bros) that you are an "art patron" without the messiness that comes with a real work on canvas that can get damaged by sun, fire, moisture... where's all the risk? The value is all declarative and speculative. As others have offered, this is like land on the moon. I could sort of see the logic if this was tied to a massively popular online game where it enforced your ability to have the one custom skin and no one else can use it, with the cooperation of the game itself. But in general this is not what's happening. It seems primarily driven by speculation and probably a criminal element... crypto bros wanting in on the money laundering and tax evasion possibilities of art collecting without all the business of actually you know, having it.