3 ms·

> The best way to think about NFTs for JPEGs is as buying the "original" of a work of art The word "original" shouldn't really be used here, because original i

> The best way to think about NFTs for JPEGs is as buying the "original" of a work of art The word "original" shouldn't really be used here, because original implies a type of uniqueness that NFTs don't confer. Say I'm a famous artist, and I make a piece of artwork. I might mint 3 NFTs that point to that artwork; let's say I even get the transactions all in the same block. In that scenario, which one of them is the original artwork? They all point to the exact some URL, they all point to the exact same content. They're not reproductions, all 3 of them are identical to each other in regards to how and where they display the image, and all 3 are issued by the same artist at the same time. The only thing that's different between them, both technically and socially, is the serial number on the token. The non-fungible part of NFTs refer to the tokens themselves, not the things they're pointing at. The artwork conveys some amount of context around the NFT that may make you want it more (ie, "this is the only NFT issued by the original artist for piece X"). And the artist might choose to only mint one token for a piece of artwork. But it's a mistake to look at the NFTs as being intrinsically linked to the "original" status of the artwork. The context of the NFT is what you are buying, not the artwork. It is questionable whether that context has value, but apparently some people think it does. This problem of original/reproduction becomes even more obvious when NFTs are minted by the authors of existing pieces of artwork that may have already been online for years. In that case, it would make more sense to say that NFT itself points to a replication of the original artwork since it will almost certainly point towards a new URL where the artwork has been replicated over from the original URL. The broader problem here is that "originality" isn't really a concept that makes sense with bits of information. A piece of artwork might get copied and pasted across multiple computers before it's even finished. It might be rendered out to 3 different resolutions and posted to 5 websites simultaneously as part of its initial release. There is no concept of original/copy that stands up to scrutiny with any part of digital art.

SAI_Peregrinus 5y ago
The meatspace art analogy would be prints: many artists make several prints of the same artwork. Originality isn't what's important, but provenance is. If the original author made the print from the plates, the work is "genuine", but if somebody else got the plates and made more copies those are considered less valuable. Copies made from copying the plates themselves would be considered forgeries. NFTs are the same. You can have "geniune" NFTs minted by the original artist (any number can be minted) and "forged" NFTs minted by anyone else. Of course since NFTs don't actually contain the work they're more like certificates of provenance for prints, or forgeries thereof. Personally I find the whole thing ridiculous. Even in the physical art world, why should it matter who made the print if the plates are the originals? NFTs are just like buying certificates of authenticity of prints without buying a copy of the print, which is utterly moronic!

SAI_Peregrinus 5y ago

The meatspace art analogy would be prints: many artists make several prints of the same artwork. Originality isn't what's important, but provenance is. If the original author made the print from the plates, the work is "genuine", but if somebody else got the plates and made more copies those are considered less valuable. Copies made from copying the plates themselves would be considered forgeries. NFTs are the same. You can have "geniune" NFTs minted by the original artist (any number can be minted) and "forged" NFTs minted by anyone else. Of course since NFTs don't actually contain the work they're more like certificates of provenance for prints, or forgeries thereof. Personally I find the whole thing ridiculous. Even in the physical art world, why should it matter who made the print if the plates are the originals? NFTs are just like buying certificates of authenticity of prints without buying a copy of the print, which is utterly moronic!