5 ms·

> Now with an NFT you're not technically selling a picture and I'm still not entirely sure why someone buying an NFT of an open source picture makes any sense a

> Now with an NFT you're not technically selling a picture and I'm still not entirely sure why someone buying an NFT of an open source picture makes any sense at all but it is kind of inherent to what's being sold, because I don't think anyone would pay the same for some random bits of information. It makes sense as some people right now are willing to pay for it, thinking they will eventually make a profit with that sort of "investment". It could go both ways. Those selling NFT might be successful at creating a sense of value (through big influencers, marketing...) or eventually fail only time will tell. Remember ICO? Which one wasn't a scam again? NFT itself is an "art performance", since it make us question the notion of "value". What is value? Why this or that item, physical or digital is valuable? Resources are certainly finite as well as knowledgeable and skilled people, but value is often completely disconnected from any fundamentals in crypto. It's crazy though how most western government are completely hands off when it comes to crypto regulation. Especially in Europe. In USA you see the SEC cracking down on a few crypto scams and suing ICO issuers.

fennecfoxen 5y ago
The problem with NFTs as “performance art” is that the bulk of the performances are zero-content, trivially reproducible exercises in pointing to something else, and that’s just not special. Such NFTs can be reissued by any one of thousands of off-brand NFT-minters, most of which will be just as good as the first to mint, which is to say, not good at all. The long run supply and demand picture suggest the outlook for those is pretty bleak. Compare another recent speculative craze: some rare Beanie Babies are still worth a lot! (Valentino the bear is $1900 on eBay.) But most aren’t worth more than their value as a toy, about $5. What do common NFTs have that give them value when they’re not part of an active hype machine process anymore?
- thrashh 5y ago
  I mean most art is like this. Most “common” art isn’t going to fetch millions, but a select few do. NFTs aren’t any different. As for “off brand minters,” some people care a lot about provenance. I don’t and you might not, but that’s also why we don’t buy art worth millions of dollars. But some people do care, just like how some people care about collecting stamps or playing basketball. Some people like different things and obviously if you don’t like a particular thing, you’re not going to “get it.”
  - fennecfoxen 5y ago
    > Most “common” art isn’t going to fetch millions, but a select few do. NFTs aren’t any different. Yeah, but set aside the million-dollar ones for a moment and imagine you found a new kind of art which consisted of the "artist" printing out a single copy of someone's work, and selling the printout for $150-$10,000 each. This copy has not been authorized by the person who made the work. The technology to make a functionally identical printout is readily available, though there's some ledger that tracks it and it won't be registered as the same object as the first printout. Would you say that the purchaser of this printout is investing money wisely, or foolishly? Would you say that "artist" is a legitimate actor, or some kind of scammer, thief, crook, or the like?

fennecfoxen 5y ago

The problem with NFTs as “performance art” is that the bulk of the performances are zero-content, trivially reproducible exercises in pointing to something else, and that’s just not special. Such NFTs can be reissued by any one of thousands of off-brand NFT-minters, most of which will be just as good as the first to mint, which is to say, not good at all. The long run supply and demand picture suggest the outlook for those is pretty bleak. Compare another recent speculative craze: some rare Beanie Babies are still worth a lot! (Valentino the bear is $1900 on eBay.) But most aren’t worth more than their value as a toy, about $5. What do common NFTs have that give them value when they’re not part of an active hype machine process anymore?

thrashh 5y ago
I mean most art is like this. Most “common” art isn’t going to fetch millions, but a select few do. NFTs aren’t any different. As for “off brand minters,” some people care a lot about provenance. I don’t and you might not, but that’s also why we don’t buy art worth millions of dollars. But some people do care, just like how some people care about collecting stamps or playing basketball. Some people like different things and obviously if you don’t like a particular thing, you’re not going to “get it.”
- fennecfoxen 5y ago
  > Most “common” art isn’t going to fetch millions, but a select few do. NFTs aren’t any different. Yeah, but set aside the million-dollar ones for a moment and imagine you found a new kind of art which consisted of the "artist" printing out a single copy of someone's work, and selling the printout for $150-$10,000 each. This copy has not been authorized by the person who made the work. The technology to make a functionally identical printout is readily available, though there's some ledger that tracks it and it won't be registered as the same object as the first printout. Would you say that the purchaser of this printout is investing money wisely, or foolishly? Would you say that "artist" is a legitimate actor, or some kind of scammer, thief, crook, or the like?