4 ms·

The artwork can be copied, but not the provenance. If the artist publishes address(es) from which authorized tokens are released, authenticity can easily be ve

The artwork can be copied, but not the provenance. If the artist publishes address(es) from which authorized tokens are released, authenticity can easily be verified. A NFT purporting to have been created by them will not have been originally sent from an authorized address, as long as the artist's private key(s) have not been compromised. So whatever value is attached to the art having been created by that artist is lost, because it cannot be proven that it came from them.

lottin 6y ago
> authenticity can easily be verified Authenticity of what? What does it mean for a JPEG of some work of digital art to be authentic? As long as it is bit-by-bit identical to the original, authenticity (whatever it means) makes absolutely no difference.
- downandout 6y ago
  What does it mean for a JPEG of some work of digital art to be authentic? Authentic means that it was put on the blockchain by an address owned by the artist. It means that the art could have only come from a specific artist. As long as it is bit-by-bit identical to the original, authenticity (whatever it means) makes absolutely no difference. Of course it makes a difference in value. If your neighbor was able to exactly duplicate a Picasso, do you think it would hold the same value as an original Picasso? It wouldn’t. A big part of the value of art is the provenance and the story behind it and the artist.
  - lottin 6y ago
    That's because a Picasso is physical object and people feel attached to physical objects. We don't feel attached to a particular digital copy of a JPEG. And, by the way, the JPEG is not on the blockchain. The NFT on the blockchain tells us nothing about the provenance of the various JPEG copies that exist or about their authenticity.
    - downandout 6y ago
      Again, the blockchain can positively tell you that the data (whether it’s just a reference to the image or the image itself) was put there by a specific person that had the keys to a specific address. If that address is associated with the artist, then the artist (or someone with their private keys) put it there. Depending on who that person is, it can add value. This NFT by Beeple [1] just sold for $70 million. Something tells me that your copy, which will not have been put on the blockchain by an address associated with Beeple, won’t fetch the same price. [1] https://apnews.com/article/beeple-nft-christies-record-sale-69-million-548cfccdad07dc86e7ac09c9926aea38 https://apnews.com/article/beeple-nft-christies-record-sale-...
      - lottin 6y ago
        I don't think that you understand NFTs at all. What's been sold for $70 million is an NFT—a digital token on a blockchain. Not a copy of a digital work by Beeple.
        downandout 6y ago
        Yes, and that NFT had value because it could be proven that it came from Beeple, and represented a specific piece of art. It’s as simple as that.
        lottin 6y ago
        Exactly, it's as simple as that. No piece of digital art was sold in that auction, and no provenance of any piece of art was established either. Your point was?

lottin 6y ago

> authenticity can easily be verified Authenticity of what? What does it mean for a JPEG of some work of digital art to be authentic? As long as it is bit-by-bit identical to the original, authenticity (whatever it means) makes absolutely no difference.

downandout 6y ago
What does it mean for a JPEG of some work of digital art to be authentic? Authentic means that it was put on the blockchain by an address owned by the artist. It means that the art could have only come from a specific artist. As long as it is bit-by-bit identical to the original, authenticity (whatever it means) makes absolutely no difference. Of course it makes a difference in value. If your neighbor was able to exactly duplicate a Picasso, do you think it would hold the same value as an original Picasso? It wouldn’t. A big part of the value of art is the provenance and the story behind it and the artist.
- lottin 6y ago
  That's because a Picasso is physical object and people feel attached to physical objects. We don't feel attached to a particular digital copy of a JPEG. And, by the way, the JPEG is not on the blockchain. The NFT on the blockchain tells us nothing about the provenance of the various JPEG copies that exist or about their authenticity.
  - downandout 6y ago
    Again, the blockchain can positively tell you that the data (whether it’s just a reference to the image or the image itself) was put there by a specific person that had the keys to a specific address. If that address is associated with the artist, then the artist (or someone with their private keys) put it there. Depending on who that person is, it can add value. This NFT by Beeple [1] just sold for $70 million. Something tells me that your copy, which will not have been put on the blockchain by an address associated with Beeple, won’t fetch the same price. [1] https://apnews.com/article/beeple-nft-christies-record-sale-69-million-548cfccdad07dc86e7ac09c9926aea38 https://apnews.com/article/beeple-nft-christies-record-sale-...
    - lottin 6y ago
      I don't think that you understand NFTs at all. What's been sold for $70 million is an NFT—a digital token on a blockchain. Not a copy of a digital work by Beeple.
      - downandout 6y ago
        Yes, and that NFT had value because it could be proven that it came from Beeple, and represented a specific piece of art. It’s as simple as that.
        lottin 6y ago
        Exactly, it's as simple as that. No piece of digital art was sold in that auction, and no provenance of any piece of art was established either. Your point was?