3 ms·
Same with paintings, etc. So yeah it's a wonky argument because it ignores subjective judgement
by agravier 5y ago
Same with paintings, etc. So yeah it's a wonky argument because it ignores subjective judgement
- stickfigure 5y agoYou can hang a painting on your wall and flaunt it. Nobody looks at the bits on your hard disk.
- doublerebel 5y agoMany NFTs either come with or are designed for a physical representation. 100s or 1000s are already installed and viewable IRL. Being an NFT does not preclude the art from being traditionally enjoyed.
- stickfigure 5y agoBeing an NFT does not preclude anyone else from hanging the exact same physical representation on their wall. Exclusivity matters if you want to impress your rich friends.
- doublerebel 5y agoThat is a circular argument. That is the same argument as print vs original -- NFT owners are paying for the original to support the art regardless of how accurate a print may be. It's much more impressive to those people to have paid to support the original rather than having a knockoff... This has been true as long as goods have been produced.
- mostlyghostly 5y agoYes and No. Most paintings don't have (much) value. Behold my latest work, the brown ring of quality... do I hear... 5 cents? A few paintings have value, primarily due to the fame of the artist or the history of the piece (It hung <place>). Supply is frequently capped by the fact the artist is dead...
- agravier 5y agoYes, the historical and social context, etc, which are subjectively valued. I expect that those who purchase NTF with the hope that they appreciate also count on the value of the token being part of a "limited collection", or being one of the first (an NFT from 2021 becoming a "historically significant" thing due to being one of the first ever produced), or such speculative considerations.