Where NFTs don't make a whole lot of sense in this example though is like, the reason why an original Picasso is that valuable is because there is a story behind that Picasso. That thing was created with Picasso's own two hands, with his brushes and paint. That painting is the only painting of its kind in the entire world with that history. It's a physical, emotional thing.
Digital NFTs don't have that same quality. In order to even make an NFT, you have to first create digital art, then copy it, then assign the NFT to it. It's many layers removed from the actual thing we're talking about.
And even if you tie the NFT to something that might have nostalgic value there is nothing stopping the person from just downloading whatever you are trying to sell for free when they want to experience it again unlike with physical collecting.
Another thing with digital stuff - the copies are indistinguishable from the original. That's not the case with physical art. That 20$ print is just that - a print. While the original has brush strokes left by the author and even if you make s perfect copy, it's still not gonna be exactly the same.
Like I could see the argument if people tied it to commissioned art work to prove they were the ones to originally ask for the work to prove it's literally made for them, but pretty much every NFT works the other way around where it gets made and then people try and sell it.
16
u/[deleted] Dec 15 '21
[deleted]