3 ms·

No, because you're rich as hell and will hire an actual expert to validate the origin of the painting. Come on, you think art history experts are the ones actua

No, because you're rich as hell and will hire an actual expert to validate the origin of the painting. Come on, you think art history experts are the ones actually buying these paintings, as opposed to rich folk with too much money?

onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
You think just because you're rich you can't have any taste in art? Look - MBS bought that fake Da Vinci for $450M or whatever. I don't think the majority of people buying $50M+ paintings are complete morons. Maybe they are.
- selestify 5y ago
  When did I say the rich don't have taste in art? I said the rich won't know whether they bought an original or a fake, because the fakes are high quality enough to pass as the real thing to the untrained eye. The art is worth that much not because of the aesthetics qualities, but because of the provenance and the high-status signaling and bragging rights that come with said provenance. > Look - MBS bought that fake Da Vinci for $450M or whatever. Case in point. That's why you hire an expert (or perhaps even a team of experts) to help you out.
  - onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
    No - it's worth that much because of who painted it. There are shitty drafts of Guernica that Picasso did that sell for hundreds of thousands. There are infinitely better drawings that one could not sell for a single penny. The artist is what gives it value. It's truly scarce because only so much work came from that artist - who people are obsessed with. I will 100% grant that it's mostly about signaling and bragging rights. But NFTs are artificially scarce. Original work from Picasso is truly scarce.
    - selestify 5y ago
      It's most definitely not worth as much as MBS paid for it now that it's known to be a reproduction. > But NFTs are artificially scarce. We're just going in circles now. Reread my previous response to why they're no more artificially scarce than Picassos.

onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago

You think just because you're rich you can't have any taste in art? Look - MBS bought that fake Da Vinci for $450M or whatever. I don't think the majority of people buying $50M+ paintings are complete morons. Maybe they are.

selestify 5y ago
When did I say the rich don't have taste in art? I said the rich won't know whether they bought an original or a fake, because the fakes are high quality enough to pass as the real thing to the untrained eye. The art is worth that much not because of the aesthetics qualities, but because of the provenance and the high-status signaling and bragging rights that come with said provenance. > Look - MBS bought that fake Da Vinci for $450M or whatever. Case in point. That's why you hire an expert (or perhaps even a team of experts) to help you out.
- onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
  No - it's worth that much because of who painted it. There are shitty drafts of Guernica that Picasso did that sell for hundreds of thousands. There are infinitely better drawings that one could not sell for a single penny. The artist is what gives it value. It's truly scarce because only so much work came from that artist - who people are obsessed with. I will 100% grant that it's mostly about signaling and bragging rights. But NFTs are artificially scarce. Original work from Picasso is truly scarce.
  - selestify 5y ago
    It's most definitely not worth as much as MBS paid for it now that it's known to be a reproduction. > But NFTs are artificially scarce. We're just going in circles now. Reread my previous response to why they're no more artificially scarce than Picassos.