> The thing that ties both of them is spending money on a non-productive asset, which serves as a costly signal of your wealth For a common sense person only a

> The thing that ties both of them is spending money on a non-productive asset, which serves as a costly signal of your wealth For a common sense person only an expensive painting serves as tool to signal one's wealth. An expensive NFT is a tool to signal one's foolishness. For all practical purposes it's like paying 6 figures for some bottled air sampled in Times Square and trying to use it as a way to impress people. You'd get a huge minus both in your wallet as well as your social status. You could be living in Versailles but if you get to the last room and show people your collection of hashes....then you throw all the other 1000 gold plated rooms straight into the bin and your guests will laugh at you. That is of course unless you preselect people who hang out in /r/NFTs and only ever invite them over. There's only 237k of them. Let's say 25% would endorse spending 6 figures for an NFT and still think highly of you. So that's 60k people. You have to preselect among 60k people on the planet, whereas the expensive paintings would get you the admiration of each and every of the 8.2 billion people. No preselection needed. Again: Common sense.