> But, the idea of using them to claim "ownership" of a JPEG or something seems ridiculous to me on its face. IIRC, it's worse than that. You don't "own" a JP

> But, the idea of using them to claim "ownership" of a JPEG or something seems ridiculous to me on its face. IIRC, it's worse than that. You don't "own" a JPEG. A database says that you "own" a URL, but there's nothing about that URL that is owned. You don't have any rights to what's at that URL. Heck, there's no guarantee that the URL even loads now, let alone in six months. And the content can change at any time. > Either I don't understand how it's supposed to work, or a lot of people have been very publicly taken for a lot of money via NFTs. It's a reputation/status thing.