3 ms·

I don't get it. It seems like selling virtual gold mined from Ultima Online macros circa 2001. Without anything of intrinsic worth, it doesn't seem like a durab

I don't get it. It seems like selling virtual gold mined from Ultima Online macros circa 2001. Without anything of intrinsic worth, it doesn't seem like a durable investment. It does seem like a good way to dodge taxes and export drug money. I'd rather have a real van Gogh rolled-up somewhere in my FU money civilization-escape yacht.

ct0 6y ago
Yeah I agree with this, something has to be going on. Every time the price makes the headline for something, be it art, real estate, etc I usually think laundering is the main driver of extraordinarily high price.
- ethanbond 6y ago
  It was apparently purchased by the CEO of the largest NFT... marketplace (?) So yeah it’s basically a marketing expense for NFTs broadly.
  - rasz 6y ago
    Its a scam. Like https://www.engadget.com/2019-02-15-super-mario-bros-cartridge-auction.html https://www.engadget.com/2019-02-15-super-mario-bros-cartrid... "Super Mario Bros. is now jointly owned by three buyers: Jim Halperin, the founder and co-chairman of the collectibles auction company Heritage Auctions," classic fake pump of assets you already own a bunch and want to create illusion of value
  - ChainOfFools 6y ago
    or, in the time honored tradition of the ICO, it's one entity moving money from one obfuscated pocket to the other, under the pretext of a "sale," to inflate the value of an asset class they want to draw unsophisticated attention ($) to. Pretending two wallet addresses are unaffiliated prior to a transaction is trivial to arrange and with some forethought would be invisible to blockchain analysis. But the superficial story is too juicy for the tech (and now, art) press to ignore, and the people savvy enough to expose the fraud also happen to be elbow deep in Eth/crypto HODLings and stand to benefit far too much by letting it proceed without criticism.
krsdcbl 6y ago
why is a Van Gough worth as much though? It's basically a little pigment on some linen, it's not inherently worth any more than the next piece of art that is "ownable".
- waheoo 6y ago
  Inherent worth only provides a price floor in a market. It only plays a partial role in determining the ceiling. For that you need to incorporate a whole manner of values. Cost, direct, indirect, amortised nor not. Value proposition, both yang ble and intangible. Scarcity, uniqueness and availability, time to produce, time to reproduce. This is why it was so abhorrent when bankers and media brought up inherent value of GameStop, it's one small part of the equation and has very little to do with the situation.
- cam0 6y ago
  I get your point, but I think it's worth considering the sheer beauty of a Van Gogh painting. Have you been to MoMA and spent 30+ minutes looking at The Starry Night. Compared to Beeple https://www.beeple-crap.com/archive https://www.beeple-crap.com/archive who straight up says: "Most of my work is complete fucking garbage, but this old shit is reallllllly fucking bad. Seriously. I mean, you can look at this shit if you want to but just know that it is most likely making you dumber and a shittier human being. It’s that bad."
  - beaconstudios 6y ago
    Van Gogh's work may be beautiful (I'm more of a Vermeer guy myself) but it's not 100,000x more beautiful than the work of a skilled artist who hasn't been pumped up by a tragic story and centuries of art snob hype. The value of high art is purely socially constructed and is an aristocratic class signal.
    - doggodaddo78 6y ago
      Yup. It's pretty strong though compared to random nobody doodles. Picasso, Rembrandt, van Gogh aren't going to lose value anytime soon.
Keeeeeeeks 6y ago
Respectfully, why would you take a water-vulnerable art piece onto a yacht, when: 1. Yachts are big targets 2. Art is a big target 3. Neither of these things will be post-civilization money, but will 4. Signal that you are a target full of assets that can be flipped for high value stuff Which is all to say that these are information asymmetry problems, and everything frontier "isn't a durable investment" until it is. It's silly to dodge taxes on-chain when it's free and easy to pull a list of addresses that have the biggest on-chain value, look at how they're tagged on a block explorer, and figure out if they have a US entity that should have reporeted taxes on the transactional history
- doggodaddo78 6y ago
  Uhh... Use common sense. You have them in special, sealed, floating containers. And I would have an automatic ejection system (salt plugs perhaps) for them should the craft sink.

ct0 6y ago

Yeah I agree with this, something has to be going on. Every time the price makes the headline for something, be it art, real estate, etc I usually think laundering is the main driver of extraordinarily high price.

ethanbond 6y ago
It was apparently purchased by the CEO of the largest NFT... marketplace (?) So yeah it’s basically a marketing expense for NFTs broadly.
- rasz 6y ago
  Its a scam. Like https://www.engadget.com/2019-02-15-super-mario-bros-cartridge-auction.html https://www.engadget.com/2019-02-15-super-mario-bros-cartrid... "Super Mario Bros. is now jointly owned by three buyers: Jim Halperin, the founder and co-chairman of the collectibles auction company Heritage Auctions," classic fake pump of assets you already own a bunch and want to create illusion of value
- ChainOfFools 6y ago
  or, in the time honored tradition of the ICO, it's one entity moving money from one obfuscated pocket to the other, under the pretext of a "sale," to inflate the value of an asset class they want to draw unsophisticated attention ($) to. Pretending two wallet addresses are unaffiliated prior to a transaction is trivial to arrange and with some forethought would be invisible to blockchain analysis. But the superficial story is too juicy for the tech (and now, art) press to ignore, and the people savvy enough to expose the fraud also happen to be elbow deep in Eth/crypto HODLings and stand to benefit far too much by letting it proceed without criticism.

krsdcbl 6y ago

why is a Van Gough worth as much though? It's basically a little pigment on some linen, it's not inherently worth any more than the next piece of art that is "ownable".

waheoo 6y ago
Inherent worth only provides a price floor in a market. It only plays a partial role in determining the ceiling. For that you need to incorporate a whole manner of values. Cost, direct, indirect, amortised nor not. Value proposition, both yang ble and intangible. Scarcity, uniqueness and availability, time to produce, time to reproduce. This is why it was so abhorrent when bankers and media brought up inherent value of GameStop, it's one small part of the equation and has very little to do with the situation.
cam0 6y ago
I get your point, but I think it's worth considering the sheer beauty of a Van Gogh painting. Have you been to MoMA and spent 30+ minutes looking at The Starry Night. Compared to Beeple https://www.beeple-crap.com/archive https://www.beeple-crap.com/archive who straight up says: "Most of my work is complete fucking garbage, but this old shit is reallllllly fucking bad. Seriously. I mean, you can look at this shit if you want to but just know that it is most likely making you dumber and a shittier human being. It’s that bad."
- beaconstudios 6y ago
  Van Gogh's work may be beautiful (I'm more of a Vermeer guy myself) but it's not 100,000x more beautiful than the work of a skilled artist who hasn't been pumped up by a tragic story and centuries of art snob hype. The value of high art is purely socially constructed and is an aristocratic class signal.
  - doggodaddo78 6y ago
    Yup. It's pretty strong though compared to random nobody doodles. Picasso, Rembrandt, van Gogh aren't going to lose value anytime soon.

Keeeeeeeks 6y ago

Respectfully, why would you take a water-vulnerable art piece onto a yacht, when: 1. Yachts are big targets 2. Art is a big target 3. Neither of these things will be post-civilization money, but will 4. Signal that you are a target full of assets that can be flipped for high value stuff Which is all to say that these are information asymmetry problems, and everything frontier "isn't a durable investment" until it is. It's silly to dodge taxes on-chain when it's free and easy to pull a list of addresses that have the biggest on-chain value, look at how they're tagged on a block explorer, and figure out if they have a US entity that should have reporeted taxes on the transactional history

doggodaddo78 6y ago
Uhh... Use common sense. You have them in special, sealed, floating containers. And I would have an automatic ejection system (salt plugs perhaps) for them should the craft sink.