3 ms·
It's not just art... It's why otherwise ordinary items have sentimental value. Like a specific stuffed animal, or a mile marker. NFTs lack an intrinsic to conve
by fl0wenol 5y ago
It's not just art... It's why otherwise ordinary items have sentimental value. Like a specific stuffed animal, or a mile marker. NFTs lack an intrinsic to convey this that goes beyond the digital item itself. Having or looking at a digital asset can itself be nostalgic, but the NFT does not specifically effect this, except in the sense of the act of buying it.
- tshaddox 5y agoAgain, it’s the fact that the artist issued the NFT. Why are autographs from famous people valuable (sentimentally, and sometimes financially) even though signing autographs doesn’t require much creativity or effort, and signing autographs has nothing to do with why the people are famous?
- fl0wenol 5y agore: autographs because of the comment limit They're valuable because that meant the autographer had to be present and see and individually touch whatever was being signed. Often times it is a memento of a fan meeting their idol. NFTs have no such limitations on their issuers.
- tshaddox 5y agoIf you’re talking about NFTs that weren’t authorized by the artist, then of course I agree. I have been talking about NFTs that are deliberately issued by the artist.
- fl0wenol 5y agoNo, I understood. But the value of a piece of art that is pre-signed by the artist, versus a print that was signed after-the-fact, is not the same. Some of the value comes from authentication. But if mass produced, this is not really more valuable than the author's printed name on a book. Some of the value comes from the face-to-face interaction between the artist or famous individual and the signed item. This has no analog in the NFT.