Tweets as Non-fungible tokens (NFT) - Dorsey's million dollar tweet

[paxmao]

Twitter founder and CEO Jack Dorsey has made a NFT (non-fungible token) out of his first tweet ever "“just setting up my twttr” and now is auctioning it at "Valuables by Cent". And he is not the only one, actually many people (virtually anyone) can do the same. I think that if this catches speed there may be many more tokenised "moments in history" including videos, first scenes of actors, digital art, ...

Offer's getting ridiculously high.

Potentially, the content of significant tweets will very frequently become property of someone and that will be carefully registered in distributed blockchain ledgers. I can see a clear market for celebrities, politicians and leaders.

[hugeblack]

I do not know what the value is about this thing, it is not an art and it is not supposed to carry value.
Frankly, I do not understand NFT's tokens, nor do I think they are ideal investment tools. They are exactly the same as the deals made to buy paintings.
I also think that the founder of Tron is trying to make some indirect profit by buying that tweet. He does not aim to buy it because it is of value, but because this news can move the market.

[RickDeckard]

I'll ride this topic by asking the members of the community if they could enlight me on Non-Fungible Tokens. I've already had my fair share of google search but I would like to know what are your guys stance on it as well.
To me it just seems something that came out of nowhere and that it's making people/artists rich by day. I think this actually gives a negative opinion towards BTC (because, let me honest, anytime the average joe hears about virtual coins , BTC will be the first thing it will come to their mind) because people will start to think that this is a scam or something that just de valuates the message/goal of BTC.

Still it's strange to see Dorsey, someone who was one of the early celebrities to see the value of BTC, to embrace NFT's. Are they they at the same level of BTC in terms of disruption?

[goaldigger]

Many will do the same thing for sure since NFT are rising and the screenshot of history is quiet easy to do, well its good that its also cheap and I thought it can be sold for $1k and above. I’m trying to do some art for NFT but I’m still on a search about this one and hopefully, I can also share some good art and monetize it as well.

[paxmao]

I'll ride this topic by asking the members of the community if they could enlight me on Non-Fungible Tokens. I've already had my fair share of google search but I would like to know what are your guys stance on it as well..

Just in case someone still does not know, NFT are those that are unique, that is, you can distinguish one from another. The best way to understand this is thinking a Picasso versus a USD. Any USD is like any other USD (more or less) at least in value, but any picture is unique.

I have mentioned my view here, but in essence, it makes sense in videogames and electronic property where ownership has an utility (e.g. Decentraland, etc...), otherwise (e.g. gifs and tweets) makes little sense to me.

[mk4]

Digital art through NFTs we're a total miss for me, and here comes NFT tweets. Like I know Jack Dorsey's like a thousand times smarter than me no doubt, but what the hell I don't know what he's thinking with this. I literally don't get the point of having "ownership" of tweets just by tokenizing it. I mean, what the heck do I do with it? It's bollocks. I actually want to be open minded to understand and embrace it, but I simply can't.

[hatshepsut93]

Digital art through NFTs we're a total miss for me, and here comes NFT tweets. Like I know Jack Dorsey's like a thousand times smarter than me no doubt, but what the hell I don't know what he's thinking with this. I literally don't get the point of having "ownership" of tweets just by tokenizing it. I mean, what the heck do I do with it? It's bollocks. I actually want to be open minded to understand and embrace it, but I simply can't.

Right, I doubt many countries would legally recognize NFT, and there's no software mechanism for enforcing ownership too. It's pretty much the same as selling Moon land or some distant stars - a pointless record in a database that has no real life consequences. The fact that so many people are jumping this bandwagon just shows how speculative and irrational the crypto sphere is, and how there's a lot of "dumb money" - probably some early ETH investors who now sit on millions worth of ether and don't know what to do with it.

[Darker45]

I do not know what the value is about this thing, it is not an art and it is not supposed to carry value.
Frankly, I do not understand NFT's tokens, nor do I think they are ideal investment tools. They are exactly the same as the deals made to buy paintings.

I'm also quite amazed at this rising NFT craze. But it's not really totally surprising knowing how people could be really crazy on anything. Hundreds of billions have been squandered on the most useless of stuff. Would you even imagine wiping that shit off your asshole with a 1.38-million dollar gold toilet paper?^[1] That's how crazy people could be.

So this NFT thing is just another craze, although digital in nature, which suits perfectly in our rising digital age today.

Anyway, I won't compare this with paintings. Paintings could be investments. Since time immemorial, paintings have been given varying values. And they don't just come and go. Your Monet painting, for example, still has that high value after several decades of preservation, and it will likely continue to appreciate a century from now.

[1] https://beamazed.com/amusement/expensive-useless-things-millionaires-spend-money

[mk4]

Right, I doubt many countries would legally recognize NFT, and there's no software mechanism for enforcing ownership too. It's pretty much the same as selling Moon land or some distant stars - a pointless record in a database that has no real life consequences. The fact that so many people are jumping this bandwagon just shows how speculative and irrational the crypto sphere is, and how there's a lot of "dumb money" - probably some early ETH investors who now sit on millions worth of ether and don't know what to do with it.

While I really don't care about legalization, yea I agree. If anything, this is far far worse than buying/selling moon land. I might end up being wrong here, but I'm calling it— the Tweet/digital art NFT hype is going to die down a lot faster and a lot harder than the ICO hype. And I hope it happens sooner.

[dihari]

Thanks to Jack Dorsey for his support in cryptosphere. Even I don't really care with what he did or who will take the offer. He just raising awareness of tokenization. Nft is the new era of digital art ownership.
After this, we're hoping there will be more to come from artist/influencers.

[so98nn]

Digital art through NFTs we're a total miss for me, and here comes NFT tweets. Like I know Jack Dorsey's like a thousand times smarter than me no doubt, but what the hell I don't know what he's thinking with this. I literally don't get the point of having "ownership" of tweets just by tokenizing it. I mean, what the heck do I do with it? It's bollocks. I actually want to be open minded to understand and embrace it, but I simply can't.

After reading your answer it make sense with what OP said. I also heard NFT all the time over different tweets and it’s always there now and then on my timeline.
Ownership of tweet is something that’s ridiculous idea. Why anyone would want a paid tweet in first place? May be Twitter CEO just wants to increase their fortune with such system in place considering ever growing popularity of crypto currencies. He knows this is perfect time to publish something like this.

[mk4]

May be Twitter CEO just wants to increase their fortune with such system in place considering ever growing popularity of crypto currencies. He knows this is perfect time to publish something like this.

I wouldn't go that far just yet. Jack Dorsey made the tweet concerning the NFT in his personal account in the first place, not Twitter's main account. It's not like it's integrated into Twitter or something(at least, for now...).

[joniboini]

Thanks to Jack Dorsey for his support in cryptosphere. Even I don't really care with what he did or who will take the offer. He just raising awareness of tokenization. Nft is the new era of digital art ownership.
After this, we're hoping there will be more to come from artist/influencers.

As others have said, this is just a move to increase his fortune since NFT is hot as hell right now. NFT has use cases for sure, but not for blatantly buying low-quality memes or art printed on the blockchain. I do believe we'll see another "ICO boom" like others, and after that, the market will mature again, which means lots of people will lose their money sooner or later.

Unless you find arts with the same level as Mona Lisa or anything like that, don't pay for any token.

[aysg76]

Twitter founder and CEO Jack Dorsey has made a NFT (non-fungible token) out of his first tweet ever "“just setting up my twttr” and now is auctioning it at "Valuables by Cent". And he is not the only one, actually many people (virtually anyone) can do the same. I think that if this catches speed there may be many more tokenised "moments in history" including videos, first scenes of actors, digital art, ...

Offer's getting ridiculously high.

Potentially, the content of significant tweets will very frequently become property of someone and that will be carefully registered in distributed blockchain ledgers. I can see a clear market for celebrities, politicians and leaders.

NFT's are all around these days as artwork and digital painting are sold in million dollars in Non fungible Tokens (NFT).Released in 2017 cryptopunks were released as first NFT on the Ethereum blockchain.They are just tokens which provide you the ownership of any assest mostly artworks.But whats the fun of getting a tweet through them.What ownership or usage will be of buying the first tweet of Social media Twitter for $2.5 million which is highest bid at this time? So it's just a wastage and these NFT are gaining much popularity around the news.Some of the famous NFTs bid are :

1)10 sec video sold for $6.6 million

2)Elon's girlfriend Grimes sold 10 paintings for $6 million

But I don't really understand how someone can pay such amounts for them.

[jaysabi]

Twitter founder and CEO Jack Dorsey has made a NFT (non-fungible token) out of his first tweet ever "“just setting up my twttr” and now is auctioning it at "Valuables by Cent". And he is not the only one, actually many people (virtually anyone) can do the same. I think that if this catches speed there may be many more tokenised "moments in history" including videos, first scenes of actors, digital art, ...

Offer's getting ridiculously high.

Potentially, the content of significant tweets will very frequently become property of someone and that will be carefully registered in distributed blockchain ledgers. I can see a clear market for celebrities, politicians and leaders.

I don't know how this doesn't make crypto look like a bubble. This is simply "registering" virtual ownership of nonexistent goods. A tweet isn't something that can be owned, or even sold by someone. Yet people are buying into the notion that if we register ownership of this thing that exists on the internet, other people will consider you the "owner" of it.

Yet NFT doesn't grant ownership in any practical way, the ownership is entirely artificial. If you have no property rights over what you own, you don't own the property. You can't stop people from viewing the media you "own," you can't stop people from reproducing it. You have zero real world control over whatever NFT dupes you into thinking you "own."

It's different if you're registering ownership of things that exist in the real world and it creates a legal right of ownership. But that does't exist for things like buying tweets or "owning" the Nyan cat meme.

[pugman]

Oh this is a very fucking dumb idea. I saw it on twitter, and I don't see a point to it?

Like yeah ok I get Jack Dorsey loves crypto, but come on he can do better than this ridiculously dumb NFT "valuables" thing that he has set up.  Its not just his own tweet, I saw some really questionable tweets getting ridiculous offers and I am no fan of it.

And their FAQ is a fucking google doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kBx-HXY8ow_7bElsJZ6Sk3r2V9cQjSRdWFyKCUXZtAs/ ??

Given Jack Dorsey's mind, and his love for crypto one would expect better. But right now the Valuable thing is nothing but a meme to people. 

[Flowzer]

Digital art through NFTs we're a total miss for me, and here comes NFT tweets. Like I know Jack Dorsey's like a thousand times smarter than me no doubt, but what the hell I don't know what he's thinking with this. I literally don't get the point of having "ownership" of tweets just by tokenizing it. I mean, what the heck do I do with it? It's bollocks. I actually want to be open minded to understand and embrace it, but I simply can't.

Right, I doubt many countries would legally recognize NFT, and there's no software mechanism for enforcing ownership too. It's pretty much the same as selling Moon land or some distant stars - a pointless record in a database that has no real life consequences. The fact that so many people are jumping this bandwagon just shows how speculative and irrational the crypto sphere is, and how there's a lot of "dumb money" - probably some early ETH investors who now sit on millions worth of ether and don't know what to do with it.

Im not understand too, how about if Jack Dorsey's tokenize his tweet in another NFT platform? Can the first buyer sue that issue?

The battle bid between Estavi and Justin Sun also irrational with The highest offer is $2500000 by @sinaEstavi.

[bL4nkcode]

Ye yeah, I know jack is really a huge backer of bitcoin, and extending it to other crypto related thing is normal and can be expected. Collectible arts as NFT is still understandable, but for a tweet? That doesn't make any sense.

I don't know if twitter and vcent had something in partnership in related to this since it gives hype to CT and now there are lots of twitter handles offers there tweet as NFT as if it was kind of gold, collectible or what. I may prefer to do it if it came from satoshi himself but still that doesnt make sense.

[zanezane]

I do not know what the value is about this thing, it is not an art and it is not supposed to carry value.
Frankly, I do not understand NFT's tokens, nor do I think they are ideal investment tools. They are exactly the same as the deals made to buy paintings.
I also think that the founder of Tron is trying to make some indirect profit by buying that tweet. He does not aim to buy it because it is of value, but because this news can move the market.

Think of it like an autograph or something that can be a collectible as NFTs can take the form of collectibles. I can explain NFTs although I am not sure whether it is accurate, for me NFTs are like online baseball cards that you collect hoping that it will appreciate in value overtime. Your claim about it not being an ideal investment tool could be debatable as there are a lot of NFTs popping up but that means that you have to sift through the mud to find the best one and when you find it, everything that you invested in it will multiply by a lot because NFTs are unique tokens and that uniqueness is what makes it a good investment tool. NFTs are for the poor as Artworks are for the rich.

[oleg8791]

Am I the only person who can't understand what are NFT tweets needed for? I also can't understand this NFT craze.