3 ms·

The difference with "real art" is that you have something tangible to hang on your wall. As opposed to a .jpg that anyone else can access as easily as you can.

SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago
You don't even "own" the JPG, you have a signed piece of paper that reads "iamacyborg owns that image", and which has no legal value at all. Anyone can make them regardless of who created and has legal copyright of the actual image. If you're thinking "but it can't be that stupid" then well...
- nivenkos 6y ago
  It's almost like a parody of private property ownership. As when you think about it, what gives some rich aristocrats the right to own all the land? It's not as though God Himself came down and gave it to them (though they used to claim this with Divine Right) - they just have some piece of paper which they use to enforce their "ownership" with violence, and demand rent. I hope at least the absurdity of NFTs might make more people see the absurdity of privately claiming the Earth's land and resources too.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago
    > they just have some piece of paper which they use to enforce their "ownership" with violence Technically, the state has the "monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force" and other actions, so the threat of violence to non-compliers is part of the law (and probably the largest part if you go far enough back in time to when the land claim originated). But this is a digression, unless you're making the point that NFTs and suchlike junk are lacking even that customary legitimacy. Without it, a dollar is mere "paper fiat". With it, it's a buck. > It's almost like a parody of private property ownership. Yep, without backing, this is make-believe ownership. Not technically enforceable on a .jpg image, not legally enforceable because existing property rights laws take precedence.
- iamacyborg 6y ago
  Oh no, I'm fully onboard the "this is dumb" train.
bsanr2 6y ago
Art collection is often not about the art itself. NFTs function like traditional art purchases ACTUALLY do: as proof of support for an artist and their expression.
dmingod666 6y ago
My impression is that the whole 'contemporary art market' is a nexus of the rich and a very small group of people that decide "good art".. at best it's speculative investment and at worst a front for money laundering.. Happy if someone with real insight in the industry can share their thoughts..

SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago

You don't even "own" the JPG, you have a signed piece of paper that reads "iamacyborg owns that image", and which has no legal value at all. Anyone can make them regardless of who created and has legal copyright of the actual image. If you're thinking "but it can't be that stupid" then well...

nivenkos 6y ago
It's almost like a parody of private property ownership. As when you think about it, what gives some rich aristocrats the right to own all the land? It's not as though God Himself came down and gave it to them (though they used to claim this with Divine Right) - they just have some piece of paper which they use to enforce their "ownership" with violence, and demand rent. I hope at least the absurdity of NFTs might make more people see the absurdity of privately claiming the Earth's land and resources too.
- SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago
  > they just have some piece of paper which they use to enforce their "ownership" with violence Technically, the state has the "monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force" and other actions, so the threat of violence to non-compliers is part of the law (and probably the largest part if you go far enough back in time to when the land claim originated). But this is a digression, unless you're making the point that NFTs and suchlike junk are lacking even that customary legitimacy. Without it, a dollar is mere "paper fiat". With it, it's a buck. > It's almost like a parody of private property ownership. Yep, without backing, this is make-believe ownership. Not technically enforceable on a .jpg image, not legally enforceable because existing property rights laws take precedence.
iamacyborg 6y ago
Oh no, I'm fully onboard the "this is dumb" train.

bsanr2 6y ago

Art collection is often not about the art itself. NFTs function like traditional art purchases ACTUALLY do: as proof of support for an artist and their expression.

dmingod666 6y ago

My impression is that the whole 'contemporary art market' is a nexus of the rich and a very small group of people that decide "good art".. at best it's speculative investment and at worst a front for money laundering.. Happy if someone with real insight in the industry can share their thoughts..