Change my mind: NFTs are a fad

[arbiter5]

If you're out of the loop: NFTs = Non Fungible Tokens

Buying and selling "digital art" has been a trend quite lately. People selling "ownership" of certain art for a certain amount in ETH.

Are NFTs really just pure bullshit? or is there just something I don't get? The arguments of people who like NFTs are "it's like owning the real Mona Lisa". Yes, because having a fake Mona Lisa painting is not going to be exactly the same with the original. But digital art? Literally copy paste that shit and you'll have the same exact thing.

Like this one. Sure, cool art, but buying it for 1 ETH? I just don't get it.

[1715254231]

1715254231

[1715254231]

1715254231

[franky1]

if that art token comes with a copyright licence where the new owner has rights to sue people that use(copy and paste) that art. meaning true ownership for the (tokened) licenece holder. then that art could hold some underlying value

much like how mortgage debt contracts seem meaningless by themselves as a loan recipient can just file bankruptcy and never need to repay. if everyone done it it would break the bank.
however these contracts are sold on the derivatives market for pennies on the dollar as there is some value on the back end in regards to the possible dozen pennies on the dollar that can be claimed by repayment, court order, repossession, asset seizure.

but if its just a 'heres something i made, donate me some money if you like it and i dont mind if you then copy it'.. then its not really any value in the new token, apart from a certificate that basically says 'i donated to an artist'

[Porfirii]

but if its just a 'heres something i made, donate me some money if you like it and i dont mind if you then copy it'.. then its not really any value in the new token

I think this is the way most NFTs work nowadays. I know some artists from the crypto twitter but I can't afford most of these, but if I had a lot of money, why not?

Anyway, I agree that they would be much more valuable if they had some short of copyright embedded. It shouldn't be so difficult, I guess.

[odolvlobo]

NFTs have some utility, but I think what we are seeing now is just another version of CryptoKitties.

[Vod]

If you're out of the loop: NFTs = Non Fungible Tokens

I agree NFTs are a fad, but I am the inventor of the NFCT.  - Non Fungible Crypto Tokens - the difference being the attributes (cryptobutes) on my tokens have a verifiable (blockchain) history.

Everything on BPIP, for example, could be used to create a NFCT.  Imagine a warrior in a game that has "endurance" based on "activity".  That warrior could never be duplicated, and would be much more valuable than a generic "+10 endurance" card.  

Artwork + NFCT + Copyright = the future of gaming.

[paxmao]

I published this on another thread, but I think is worth noting here that you can now NFTize a tweet and sell it. Currently there is one at 2 Million USD., but there are a number of other "cheaper" tweets.

My take on this is that it is going to far. I think NTFs have a space in the digital world, mostly in games, where these items do have an economic value linked to some type of use, as opposed to a "tweet" that anyone can see and has not other use than being read, which can anyway be done in tweeter.

[franky1]

i know some think there is value in owning something 'for posterity'
but personally if you cant do anything with a tweet. then the value is just 'posterity' . something you can talk about at cocktail parties.
EG 'i own twitter CEO first tweet"
apart from that.. i see no big deal with it

[upupup]

If you're out of the loop: NFTs = Non Fungible Tokens

Buying and selling "digital art" has been a trend quite lately. People selling "ownership" of certain art for a certain amount in ETH.

Are NFTs really just pure bullshit? or is there just something I don't get? The arguments of people who like NFTs are "it's like owning the real Mona Lisa". Yes, because having a fake Mona Lisa painting is not going to be exactly the same with the original. But digital art? Literally copy paste that shit and you'll have the same exact thing.

Like this one. Sure, cool art, but buying it for 1 ETH? I just don't get it.

you clearly got those questions after reading https://seths.blog/2021/03/nfts-are-a-dangerous-trap/

[Husires]

I can understand how digital art can have a numerical value, but how can it be proven for real arts like The Creation of Adam by Michelangelo? Will it be the digital code for the ownership certificate or is it for the real one?

[franky1]

banksy stunt done to promote NFT

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-56335948
'masked individual burns a banksy and then sells the stunt as a NFT

[bitcoinblog]

wait for sometime and u will find multiple ways to utilize NFT platforms. Specially those having game inbuilt NFT like
Decentraland
Upland
Alice - My Neibour
etc

There people will play to earn money and buy land build structure on them and give space for advertisers to advertise and earn token for them. Cashout those token and run their real life.

NFT can be anything not just selling Digital Art. All we need to explore properly what technology is actually designed for. It is not limited for just Digital art.

[Clairvoyance]

NFT is just money laundering with extra steps. They just want to have some leverage on cryptospace, appraising an art into massive evaluation but the only differences is in cryptocurrency.

Example of arts skyrocketing prices:

1. Insane Paintings Sold for Million Dollars

They do public stunts such as Banksy Burning to entice the masses that this is the trend and is the only way to go. The current NFT market is scaling massively, they are into sports right now NFT Sports. They are selling highlight clips of sports superstars and evaluating it as a rare commodity but in reality it is not. You can just watch the clip over and over again on the internet. They will entice and bolster you that you own one a rare copy and rights to the clip.

Moreover, this trend is just a way of most people with tons of money to transition it on digital currency jump and on the hype train of crypto with minimized the risk. 

1. Find a highlight.
2. Set a limited amount of copies.
3. Speculate on the price.
4. Make hype and watch the price skyrocket.

[Cryptoangel01]

If you're out of the loop: NFTs = Non Fungible Tokens

Buying and selling "digital art" has been a trend quite lately. People selling "ownership" of certain art for a certain amount in ETH.

Are NFTs really just pure bullshit? or is there just something I don't get? The arguments of people who like NFTs are "it's like owning the real Mona Lisa". Yes, because having a fake Mona Lisa painting is not going to be exactly the same with the original. But digital art? Literally copy paste that shit and you'll have the same exact thing.

Like this one. Sure, cool art, but buying it for 1 ETH? I just don't get it.

First get the understanding until then you will understand the power NFT have got.
You saying its a BS now is same as calling auctioned arts and relics a BS which doesn't make any sense

[odolvlobo]

Ownership is a social convention, and it is possible for different societies to have different conventions.

Personally, it makes no sense to me that someone would pay for an NFT because an NFT signifies nothing to me. To me, ownership signifies the ability to control the access and use of an object, whether physical or digital, and an NFT does not do that.

However, given the influences of the virtual world on their lives, I can believe that people born in the Internet Age might have a different sense of the meaning of ownership, where virtual ownership without possession or control can be a real thing.