NFTs means the future value of art is zero

>>Consider that when the Mexican government passed a law in the early 2010s to require more information about buyers, and how much cash could be spent on a single piece of art, the market cratered, as sales dipped 70 percent in less than a year.

Much of Mexico's economy, even the legitimate markets, is controlled by cartels, so operates very differently than most economies.

It might not even be the law's impediment to money laundering that caused sales to crater - it may be simply that in a country with a large outlaw faction that has thoroughly infiltrated government agencies, people with means will not want to be easily tracked/identified by attaching their identity to large purchases of luxury items.

Otherwise it's FUD.

Have you heard of this little site called Spotify? It streams music instead of selling it. It’s pretty obscure, but it’s got a few competitors. Something with the even more absurd name of Youtube Music? They run on a subscription basis, or just throw ads at you if you don’t wanna pay.

There’s a few sites like that for movies and TV shows, too.

For items that can be copied identically for basically nothing and never degrade? The only reason we even still have a first hand market for these things is that we want to compensate the producers of the work who still need to earn money to put food on the table. To do that we use the ridiculous concept of "intellectual property" to allow those producers to work within a system not designed for a post-scarcity space. I cannot conceive of a 'second hand' market ever making sense here without just piling on even more perverse concepts.

These aren't inconveniences and burdens, it's part of our reality and we're wired to handle these things. We don't consider objects we value as burdens, for as long as their perceived value is considered "high", they're not burden/trash.

You can't forget that we use physical goods to help us define and signal who we are.

And some of that stuff works because of the properties of physical goods: wear & tear have stories attached to them. A scratched leather backpack has tales of backpacking traveling, just like a collection of MTG cards.

This isn't a property of digital assets. They are barren.

Trying to enforce artificial scarcity in a medium that tends to propagate and proliferate whatever it touches is going backwards once again, like enforcing something like copyrighted digital material in the world of torrents.

Second hand digital goods makes no sense, it would be an artificial construct for the sake of itself.

We're at the point of making up problems to shove NFT as a solution for it - just like what we're seeing with art and collectibles, they're tending to be automated and mediocre.

When it comes to content, Scarcity and Internet shouldn't be in the same sentence.

Now, can weapons in games start to acquire long term wear & tear, to be more personalized to each player. Sure! Does it need to be an NFT? No.