Not sure what the confusion is with. There should be a description of what NFT entitles you to, like with ANY contract.

Here's the direct link to the full article:

People's Expensive NFTs Keep Vanishing. This Is Why

What a mess... Not the way I imagined NFTs to function—I'm a total NFT newbie, so I can't really have an informed opinion, but based on the very few things I've read so far, it doesn't look so good...

Here's another relevant article:

People Are Stealing Art and Turning It Into NFTs

I don't think this NFT craze (as currently implemented) will end well...

I hadn't listened or watched that interview, thanks for that link. Here's the YouTube video:

Why Bitcoin Now: Michael Saylor on the Best Way for Companies to Buy Bitcoin - Ep.209

I found Saylor was his usual entertaining self, trying to simplify the various concepts, and making them more digestible for Laura and the Bitcoin newbies in the audience—which is a good thing, and Saylor is pretty good at it. I think he was a bit repetitive at times, reiterating the "thermodynamically sound monetary network" line, and the points about electricity, running water and Venezuela. He did come out as trying to persuade her to a degree. "And, by the way...this", "and, by the way...that"...

Laura came out as the happy Bitcoin semi-noob, with a pinch of evilness, when she kept mentioning about "Bitcoin reaching a bubble/peak", "when to sell", and overly laughing at times. She has a pleasant personality, I like her. I didn't get the impression that she has a deeper anti-Bitcoin agenda or anything like that, but rather, that she has the typical reservations and skepticism that anyone trained in the traditional monetary system would have. To her, the crypto space is just a new, hot thing that will increase her exposure and audience, will add more Twitter followers and viewers/listeners to her interviews and podcasts, but I don't think she really fully grasps the gravity and importance of Bitcoin and how it will transform the monetary system in the near future.

It's always great to listen and watch Saylor educating the masses about Bitcoin. In retrospect, a careful listener could have even guessed Tesla's $1.5 billion Bitcoin investment announcement that came about 10 days later. I believe this interview will forever haunt Laura Shin, when the time comes when she will see in awe and disbelief that Bitcoin has exceeded $10 trillion market cap, and Apple, Google and most of the big players have bought in.

Given the exponential rise in Bitcoin prices in the past year coupled with the loss of stimulus payment support in the coming months, some investors are understandably growing concerned about a potential repeat of the 2018 sell-off. Bitcoin has experienced three boom-to-bust drawdowns of more than 80% in the past decade, and a similar sell-off in 2021 could send its price tumbling back down to around the $12,000 level.

ha, when you drive off the lot almost ANY car would depreciate 9-11% instantly, it's a fact, so harping about btc volatility is a non-starter.
What if btc declines 10%? lol
In addition, people like this always forget about the REPLACEMENT trade, which is available.

I just listened to it, for someone who wrote a book, can't even answer a simple question...

RK: I've started my own Gold Mine, "Why can't I start my own Bitcoin"

Robert knows a lot about Bitcoin, but is playing dumb just to gauge the response of Saif...

Those are the only two options? Do you only know shitty people?

Yeah, I was discussing this with my gf the other day. She has family members that have told loads of other family members. It’s really irritating, I don’t want to be having to face questions like -

‘So how many bitcoin do you have’
‘What are they all worth’
‘When will you sell’

Mind your own damn business. I don’t ask to see your wages or bank statements, assholes.

It sunk in that Apple made 1/86th of the world's money by selling overpriced crap.
We're a very special species, aren't we?  

Why are some Bitcoiners getting bent out of shape about this?  Just because NFTs run on generalized smart-contract chains,⁰ which Bitcoin is not?

With one exception: “The scarcity is artificial.  Anyone can make perfect copies of it.”

The scarcity of ownership is artificial, but it's as real as physical scarcity. There can only be one owner. So this point is moot/baseless too, BUT my objection pertains to those goods where ownership is not needed to be able to enjoy the good. As in, picture files, digital music or similar items. The issue here is enforcing DRM based on NFTs. This could be a thing, right, but then apart from the technical details, the creator, too, should be prevented from making additional copies ("reprints") of the creation. So you release, say, a tune as a NFT, and as a consequence no radio can legally broadcast it? Or can they? You sure shouldn't be allowed to release more "declassified" copies, or you are "inflating" the supply. Or I can use the song even if I don't "own" my copy's NFT? So you decide once and for all how many copies you are releasing? Shaky technical terrain. Shakier legal terrain. IANAL. Some legislation will be needed. No, not the SEC, that's right.

It's more about the fact that the artist doesn't have the right to their art anymore.

12% yearly is pretty damned good for traditional investments (of course bitcoin beats that in almost any timeline of any kind of significant timespan of 4 years or more).

As I had said several times, my various traditional investments have averaged in the ballpark of 5.5% to 6% over 30 years or so, and so anything that might consistently be having returns greater than 6% would be good (even though some years I did have returns in the 20% to 30% arena, but they did end up averaging out to around 5.5% to 6%.

Jamie Dimon is probably spinning in his grave.