3 ms·
An NFT is yet another pointless digital construct that foolish people paid huge sums for. It's like selling a jpeg that is publicly available. "In this spreadsh
by rnk 4y ago
An NFT is yet another pointless digital construct that foolish people paid huge sums for. It's like selling a jpeg that is publicly available. "In this spreadsheet a jpeg named foobar with this hashed value is owned by Fred Johnson" - this is creating something useful?
- dlubarov 4y agoA jpeg of the Mona Lisa is also publicly available, but even if I created a replica with identical brushwork, it wouldn't be worth much compared to the one in the Louvre. Would you also call original paintings a Ponzi?
- rnk 4y agoNo, but those are physical objects. Your certified original jpeg (nft) is not worth anything really if everyone else can just find the jpeg on the internet. NFTs are just silly, another reason being that they are separate from copyright ownership of the image.
- dlubarov 4y agoI don't think the physical object is really relevant. Imagine we all had robotic painters in our garages, which given $1 of materials, could precisely replicate any brushwork from some images. Surely that wouldn't destroy the value of famous originals? Because their value is based on provenance, not the physical difficulty of (re)creation. NFTs are the same - replicating a JPEG is trivial, but the replica won't have the same provenance.
- Karunamon 4y agoAnd yet, SoundCloud and the iTunes Music Store and many other such sellers of trivially duplicatable bits of data exist and are successful. And yes, those bits of data are easy to find for free online. You can just say you don't understand the appeal, that is a perfectly valid opinion.