7 ms·

John Cleese has an NFT bridge to sell you for $69.3M

55 points by herodotus 6y ago

undefined1 6y ago
I found this one amusing too: NFTs, explained https://foundation.app/0xc8f8e2f59dd95ff67c3d39109eca2e2a017d4c8a/nfts-explained-12012 https://foundation.app/0xc8f8e2f59dd95ff67c3d39109eca2e2a017...
root_axis 6y ago
NFTs will run their course. People are just dazzled by all the big money pumping up the hype, but there is just nothing satisfying about owning a mark in a digital ledger that has no actual connection to the work it references, it's simply not sustainable as a cultural phenomenon.
- adrr 6y ago
  It's like paying to name a star when there's an almost infinite amount of stars.
  - root_axis 6y ago
    Yes, that's a good analogy. Star registries were a passing fad, now relegated to the annals of cute novelty. All the more illustrative because even at their height, a mark in the registry was obviously not worth more than a few bucks just to say "hey, I own a star lol".
- Nathanba 6y ago
  it could be sustainable if companies publically announce that they intend to defend the authenticity of their NFT. ("we released an NFT that stands for ownership of a pokemon but some dude on a website also released an NFT for that pokemon and that's not okay and we sue") A private citizen creating an NFT will never work imo, at least not if he won't defend the authenticity part of the certificate. I mean that's the entire idea of any certificate, it has to mean something similar to a university degree certificate or a food safety certificate. Somebody or something has to make sure that its supply is regulated.
  - root_axis 6y ago
    A university degree or a food safety certificate are not at all like an NFT. Those types of certificates have substantive implications. A degree is a credential to signal one's expertise, a food safety certificate is a credential signaling the food meets specific standards for human consumption. Authenticity is important in these cases because it's valuable to be able to determine if the issuance of the certificate reliably correlates with what it implies. If I decide I want to hire an engineer to build a bridge, a certificate that can reliably signal they are educated in the vocation of engineering is a matter of life and death. With NFTs, authenticity is a non-issue since the NFT itself is lacking in any meaning because it has no connection to the real world.
- CTDOCodebases 6y ago
  It’s exactly like ICOs. There’s something about technology that makes people just want to adopt it without realising it is just a mechanism to an end. A NFT has no significance if it was not issued by its creator or if there are no contractual rights tied to it.
arcticbull 6y ago
Finally an NFT I can get behind. I still cannot fathom why people think buying a certificate of authenticity authenticated by nobody, whose supply can be arbitrarily increased by the seller at any time, is an interesting exercise. All you get is a certificate of authenticity for a URL lol. Nice.
- berberous 6y ago
  Do you think this is any different than real art?
  - piotrkaminski 6y ago
    I'm told that some people derive enjoyment from looking at art, particularly if nobody else can look at it. Not sure how much they'll enjoy staring at their exclusive URL...
    - rawtxapp 6y ago
      Do you need to pay millions of dollars for the enjoyment of looking at it? You can certainly do that with just a search query or a fake copy.
      - manquer 6y ago
        A fake copy of a classical painting looking close enough to the real one that only experts can say difference is going to cost in the high six digits at least. If I had enough money the difference between couple of million and 50 is not all that significant I would sure pay , same as paying for apple watch or air pods or any other premium brand quality is assured and resale value is good
        bhupy 6y ago
        Do you have a source for that? I’m no art connoisseur, but just sampling a few famous works: Starry Night, original $80 million (https://medium.com/@comma.php/more-info-of-the-starry-night-1889-by-vincent-van-gogh-ff1a2a5985d4 https://medium.com/@comma.php/more-info-of-the-starry-night-...). Replica $500 (https://www.1st-art-gallery.com/Vincent-Van-Gogh/Starry-Night.html https://www.1st-art-gallery.com/Vincent-Van-Gogh/Starry-Nigh...) Mona Lisa, original $850 million (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_paintings#Background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_paintin...), replica $250 (https://www.brushwiz.com/catalog/leonardo-da-vinci-mona-lisa-oil-painting-reproduction-104/ https://www.brushwiz.com/catalog/leonardo-da-vinci-mona-lisa...)
andyxor 6y ago
they better plant forests with all these NFT money.
mellosouls 6y ago
Previously discussed: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26531162 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26531162
rbobby 6y ago
smh/fml... it's at $33k now.
insert_coin 6y ago
NFTs are an interesting idea, and will find its place as soon as proponents stop pretending tokens are digital crypto art.
rkagerer 6y ago
I misunderstood and thought his NFT was for the real Brooklyn Bridge. That was more entertaining. I feel like someone famous could double down on this farce and "sell" an NFT they assert represents the real bridge and maybe make a quick $50k on the novelty. <headsmack>
keiferski 6y ago
Blockchain is actually pretty useful in the art world when it comes to provenance. That is, tracking the ownership chain of the work. This is much more interesting than the financial hype stories, to me.

55 points by herodotus 6y ago

I found this one amusing too: NFTs, explained https://foundation.app/0xc8f8e2f59dd95ff67c3d39109eca2e2a017d4c8a/nfts-explained-12012 https://foundation.app/0xc8f8e2f59dd95ff67c3d39109eca2e2a017...

root_axis 6y ago

NFTs will run their course. People are just dazzled by all the big money pumping up the hype, but there is just nothing satisfying about owning a mark in a digital ledger that has no actual connection to the work it references, it's simply not sustainable as a cultural phenomenon.

adrr 6y ago
It's like paying to name a star when there's an almost infinite amount of stars.
- root_axis 6y ago
  Yes, that's a good analogy. Star registries were a passing fad, now relegated to the annals of cute novelty. All the more illustrative because even at their height, a mark in the registry was obviously not worth more than a few bucks just to say "hey, I own a star lol".
Nathanba 6y ago
it could be sustainable if companies publically announce that they intend to defend the authenticity of their NFT. ("we released an NFT that stands for ownership of a pokemon but some dude on a website also released an NFT for that pokemon and that's not okay and we sue") A private citizen creating an NFT will never work imo, at least not if he won't defend the authenticity part of the certificate. I mean that's the entire idea of any certificate, it has to mean something similar to a university degree certificate or a food safety certificate. Somebody or something has to make sure that its supply is regulated.
- root_axis 6y ago
  A university degree or a food safety certificate are not at all like an NFT. Those types of certificates have substantive implications. A degree is a credential to signal one's expertise, a food safety certificate is a credential signaling the food meets specific standards for human consumption. Authenticity is important in these cases because it's valuable to be able to determine if the issuance of the certificate reliably correlates with what it implies. If I decide I want to hire an engineer to build a bridge, a certificate that can reliably signal they are educated in the vocation of engineering is a matter of life and death. With NFTs, authenticity is a non-issue since the NFT itself is lacking in any meaning because it has no connection to the real world.
CTDOCodebases 6y ago
It’s exactly like ICOs. There’s something about technology that makes people just want to adopt it without realising it is just a mechanism to an end. A NFT has no significance if it was not issued by its creator or if there are no contractual rights tied to it.

arcticbull 6y ago

Finally an NFT I can get behind. I still cannot fathom why people think buying a certificate of authenticity authenticated by nobody, whose supply can be arbitrarily increased by the seller at any time, is an interesting exercise. All you get is a certificate of authenticity for a URL lol. Nice.

berberous 6y ago
Do you think this is any different than real art?
- piotrkaminski 6y ago
  I'm told that some people derive enjoyment from looking at art, particularly if nobody else can look at it. Not sure how much they'll enjoy staring at their exclusive URL...
  - rawtxapp 6y ago
    Do you need to pay millions of dollars for the enjoyment of looking at it? You can certainly do that with just a search query or a fake copy.
    - manquer 6y ago
      A fake copy of a classical painting looking close enough to the real one that only experts can say difference is going to cost in the high six digits at least. If I had enough money the difference between couple of million and 50 is not all that significant I would sure pay , same as paying for apple watch or air pods or any other premium brand quality is assured and resale value is good
      - bhupy 6y ago
        Do you have a source for that? I’m no art connoisseur, but just sampling a few famous works: Starry Night, original $80 million (https://medium.com/@comma.php/more-info-of-the-starry-night-1889-by-vincent-van-gogh-ff1a2a5985d4 https://medium.com/@comma.php/more-info-of-the-starry-night-...). Replica $500 (https://www.1st-art-gallery.com/Vincent-Van-Gogh/Starry-Night.html https://www.1st-art-gallery.com/Vincent-Van-Gogh/Starry-Nigh...) Mona Lisa, original $850 million (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_paintings#Background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_paintin...), replica $250 (https://www.brushwiz.com/catalog/leonardo-da-vinci-mona-lisa-oil-painting-reproduction-104/ https://www.brushwiz.com/catalog/leonardo-da-vinci-mona-lisa...)

andyxor 6y ago

they better plant forests with all these NFT money.

mellosouls 6y ago

Previously discussed: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26531162 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26531162

rbobby 6y ago

smh/fml... it's at $33k now.

insert_coin 6y ago

NFTs are an interesting idea, and will find its place as soon as proponents stop pretending tokens are digital crypto art.

rkagerer 6y ago

I misunderstood and thought his NFT was for the real Brooklyn Bridge. That was more entertaining. I feel like someone famous could double down on this farce and "sell" an NFT they assert represents the real bridge and maybe make a quick $50k on the novelty. <headsmack>

keiferski 6y ago

Blockchain is actually pretty useful in the art world when it comes to provenance. That is, tracking the ownership chain of the work. This is much more interesting than the financial hype stories, to me.