6 ms·
Overly Attached Girlfriend NFT Sells for $411,000
- spiritplumber 6y agoI wonder if this is some sort of tax dodge.
- proc0 6y agoI was about to comment along these lines. One thing is digital art, but a screenshot? Uh, something is fishy here, but maybe not and I'm missing something that is making this valuable? IDK
- doggodaddo78 6y agoIt's apparent more and more that the image or digital deliverable itself is worthless, it's just the semi-"public" key while the private crypto signature is the crypto-backed part that is an exchange of actual currency. So, it doesn't matter what's exchanged, so long as it's sufficiently unique. I mean, you could auction a dick pic and it would still work.
- proc0 6y agoAgreed, but it implies that piece of digital work has inherent value of some kind, otherwise it's just a vector for sending or storing money. I guess the question why would someone think it's worth that much? It seems equivalent to buying a house for some ridiculous amount and then "donate" it to someone. It's really the fact that it amounts to a picture of someone... I think it follows all celebrities can now NFT all their pictures and movie screenshots... something that by itself seems worthless since actors perform in a film, and the story is the central piece of artwork I think (in most movies). Anyway, it's interesting regardless.
- colechristensen 6y agoThe intersection of cryptocurrencies and expensive art... it’s like what part of this isn’t some kind of fraud?
- doggodaddo78 6y agoIt's shady af rich people (drug dealers, actual princes, Nigerian princes, human traffickers, pimps, illicit arms dealers, stolen property dealers, and some Wall St.-types with gains they don't want to report) instead of burying or stashing money in cash houses or art, they just buy some crypto-backed nothings.
- randyrand 6y agoCouldnt I just create another NFT of the same image with maybe a slightly different color?
- naniwaduni 6y agoYou could, technically, create another NFT of the exact same image. It just won't be the same NFT.
- ASalazarMX 6y agoI'm seriously starting to think that selling UUIDs of virtual things could really take off. I'd call them "Green Carbon Tokens" because despite their carbon print being negligible, 50% of the profits would be used for carbon capture. My database would be a text file that anyone could download and verify. Edit: I mean plain UUIDs, so you could create billions with the same carbon used to create a NFT, and the signed text file counts as distributed because anyone can have a copy, I couldn't tamper with it and not be caught.
- lostcolony 6y agoThis is nearly that, except the distributed ledger says who owns the particular 'UUID' (not actually a UUID). So we don't have to trust you to be honest with that database.
- ytpete 6y agoBut of course, the other difference is a dramatically higher energy cost. You could never sell any kind of "green carbon tokens" on the blockchain...
- snissn 6y agodo it!
- sp332 6y agoBefore the recent bubble with insane NFT valuations, this is mostly what they were used as. E.g. putting a QR code with a NFT link inside a limited-run t-shirt. Practically just an inventory tag.
- umvi 6y agoSounds like the sale went at least partially to Laina (the girl in the picture)? It sounds like Bad Luck Brian similarly sold his meme.
- amelius 6y agoWhy would HN be interested in this? Oh wait, it's about making money without doing any actual work.
- late-stage- 6y agoHahaha, underrated comment
- ASalazarMX 6y agoMaking money via marketing, with a possibility of tax evasion / money laundering, which is even better. Edit: Sorry commenter below, I edited my comment without reading the responses, and now your looks redundant, but you were first.
- arcticbull 6y agoNFTs are also great for money laundering!
- shoulderfake 6y agoCan you elaborate on how this is done
- papercrane 6y agoSimplest thing would be a criminal "buying" an NFT from themselves with ill-gotten currency from an anonymous wallet not publicly associated with themselves and then claim the profit as capital gains.
- stcredzero 6y agoI would be very disturbed, if it turned out that all the memes were eventually owned by organized crime!
- gerdesj 6y agoThere was a lot of work involved - someone else's! OK that's facile. NFTs are a thing. They are legitimised by a blockchain, which is quite a statement in itself (my words)! NFTs are a thing that is messing with everyone's concept of normal, from young to old. This is not just the cool kids doing stuff - "Groove it dadyo" and all that bollocks. It is quite a neat way of using a blockchain to do something slightly more useful than the usual gambling. It's still gambling though. The really rubbish bit is still Proof of Work vs Proof of Steak (mmmm steak) sorry Stake. How many unicorns were burned to prove that n owns a particular NFT? If n had instead paid cash they might have felled a couple of small trees but not an entire forest but then they would not be in possession of a NFT. They would still have the forest ...
- fotta 6y agoGood for her. If people are willing to pay the money then I don’t see a reason why she shouldn’t get her bag.
- jariel 6y agoTo be clear - does the NFT come along with the publishing rights? Because that would make it different than regular NFT.
- arcticbull 6y agoAlmost certainly not haha, and good luck with enforcement. Remember Reddit’s reaction when the EU tried to “ban memes?”
- detaro 6y agoSee "Collectors rights" in the platforms ToS: https://foundation.app/terms https://foundation.app/terms he Collector’s limited license to display the Digital Artwork, includes, but is not limited to, the right to display the Digital Artwork privately or publicly: (i) for the purpose of promoting or sharing the Collector’s purchase, ownership, or interest, (ii) for the purpose of sharing, promoting, discussing, or commenting on the Digital Artwork; (iii) on third party marketplaces, exchanges, platforms, or applications in association with an offer to sell, or trade, the Digital Artwork; and (iv) within decentralized virtual environments, virtual worlds, virtual galleries, virtual museums, or other navigable and perceivable virtual environments. Collectors have the right to sell, trade, transfer, or use their Digital Artwork, but Collectors may not make “commercial use” of the Digital Artwork.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- hellbannedguy 6y ago“ NFTs do not confer ownership—Morris cannot prevent anyone from spreading the meme, nor can the new owner of the NFT. But it certifies authenticity, like a digital autograph from Morris herself.” I still don’t get it. I said this here about bitcoin years ago, and was completely wrong though. So many nights thinking about putting together a rig, but laziness, or doubt, prevented me from mining.
- vsareto 6y agoWe should just start selling PGP private keys. NFTaaS
- doggodaddo78 6y agoLet's see how many my AMD 96-thread EPYC server can generate in an hour. We'll make millions!
- arcticbull 6y agoNo you were right about Bitcoin but wrong about the rationality of markets.
- dwaltrip 6y agoThis sounds contradictory to me. Are you saying the bitcoin is a temporary delusion that will somehow fade away at some point? What will cause this so-called delusion to break? Btw, I'm not a bitcoin booster. I think the technology is interesting. Economically, I'm not too sure. Non-productive deflationary assets seem bad. I think it may be some sort of monetary tragedy of the commons. But there are some natural limitations that may prevent from spiraling too far out of control.
- ikerdanzel 6y agoExchange to conventional money like USD and Yen. These can be made illegal. USA has precedent for doing this with gold when it threaten their money supply creation ability. If there is no legal ways to convert all these digital coins to fiat currencies, their value will collapse to niche market valuation. It won't disappear completely, just enough to make it small like say total market valuations for baseball or pokemon card collections. Bitcoin technology depends on 1 fundamental flaw that is exponentially increasing demand on energy to hash. Essentially it is inflation of "energy money" to "digital money" for hashing "nothing". The demand is not triggered from population itself but the #1 increasing tech capability, and #2 algorithm itself that double the difficulties of hashing rate. Think of demand of toilet paper, that people need to buy not because they need it but the toilet consume more at a doubling rate whether you poop or not. And then itself become valuable when your neighbor willing to change it for fiat currencies. The moment government make it illegals, the value drop. Black market will exist but then law enforcers specializing to catch "digital exchange criminals" will be established.
- ModernMech 6y agoI can't believe the Department of Internet Money as depicted on South Park in 2008 (where viral internet stars went to collect their earnings) turned out to be real. Blows my mind.
- arcticbull 6y agoInteresting because the average transaction size, quantity of first party sales and quantity of resales have all fallen off a cliff over the last few weeks. I guess the memo hasn’t made it all the way to Dubai haha. [1] Probably more money laundering haha. Good for her though! [1] https://nonfungible.com/market/history https://nonfungible.com/market/history
- dcolkitt 6y agoAnd what a relief it's been for the rest of us non-NFT Ethereum users. Gas fees were even under 100 Gwei today!
- tediousdemise 6y agoI wonder if they’ll teach about memes in history classes in 100 years. By then, anti-meme and anti-hate speech laws will have likely gripped the globe, and they’ll be learning about us Web 2.0 savages. /s
- chriselles 6y agoI wonder if we’re going to look back and refer to this as the Mona Lisa Meme? I’m only half joking. I wonder which one would win in terms of reach between this meme and the Mona Lisa?
- lucasnortj 6y agoYet more evidence that NFTs and blockchains are utterly useless
- TameAntelope 6y agoSo did she approach the NFT organization or did they approach her? It mentions Bad Luck Brian and Nyan Cat but were they specifically involved in getting Morris to sell? It’s wonderful press for NFTs, but was it organic?
- wokwokwok 6y agoPlease correct the title: it was sold for 200 ETH, not $411,000. These are not the same things, and it is (to my understanding) actually very difficult to convert large volumes of ETH into actual money. One bunch of crypto coins was swapped for another, that’s all.
- downandout 6y agoIt is not remotely difficult to convert large amounts of ETH into actual money. Certainly not $400K worth. The market is enormous, and a conversion like this could be done in seconds on a number of exchanges. My arb bot managed to make about $60K over the course of 2 very lucky days about a month ago on the Binance Smart Chain. Converting BNB to ETH on the main chain, then cashing it in for fiat, couldn't have been easier. It didn't come close to causing a ripple in the market.
- doggodaddo78 6y ago"Here, I have this limited-edition bathroom rug from my master bedroom, serial #3, and you can have it for the low, low price of $85,500."