>But I also find sneaker and stamp collectors equally perplexing,
People for the most part don't get rich off of stamps. Is more of a hobby than an investment.
People for the most part don't get rich off of stamps. Is more of a hobby than an investment.
Anecdote time, I was at an Xmas party and people were talking about what crypto they were investing in. I said I speculated a bit, then got spooked and got my money out of Crypto.com. (which wasn't easy). This got everyone interested, they had no idea how to turn their Crypto back to dollars. The market is going up, because there's a one way flow of money.
Or the only voice, because no one else is interested in looking at a hash for fun. The real artwork is easily digitally duplicated and so if your hobby was to look at the art, you do not need to purchase the NFT.
I am literally interested in looking at a hash for fun, since it shows up online in NFT viewers with a little picture of it in my account. $10 is such a small amount of money to me, if I didn't spend it on an NFT then I may have bought a CS:GO skin or hypothetically some Candy Crush lollipop hammers, spent it at the arcade or put it into a slot machine or something. The NFT sparks better conversation.
That's before getting into the fact that if I buy an independently drawn NFT, that $10 doubles as a donation to help support the artist's work, and the NFT becomes public proof that I helped financially support the artist.
If you are concerned that this would need to happen off-chain, and I would need to trust my channel to God NFT launch announcement, then you are of course correct, but note that is is not a slight on NFTs.
NFTs are conceptually no different than the "Google Digital Art Marketplace", except people are less concerned it will be shutdown in two years.
I would think of art NFTs as more like character or weapon skins - completely useless except that it's visually appealing and you can show off your "ownership" of it to other people within the game. With art NFTs, the "game" so far is just NFT viewing tools, social media profile pics, etc.
Actually, premium Steam profile borders might be an even more apt analogy, since they aren't tied to any game and are also useful solely for vanity.
Of course, then you have NFTs that actually do represent usable in-game items like with Axie Infinity or Gods Unchained, but that's an adjacent topic.
That's a good point. We can only give our guess based on what we know. For example, people regarded Alan Greenspan as "smart" before 2008. I now think he is an idiot at best and a horrible, malicious person at worst (the truth is probably somewhere in between). Maybe things will change in a few decades and people will then recognize him as "smart" again? It is pretty silly trying to predict the future.
> I’d argue that someone that’s getting lucky over and over again are clearly on to something. As the saying goes: “You create your own luck”.
I present Sir Isaac Newton as a counterexample. Clearly a smart person but just because someone is smart does not mean he was right about everything. In fact, we know now that his nonsensical "work" with alchemy killed him. I am positive that this fad will fail. I am just annoyed that now the name web3 is taken by this nonsense.