Where do celebrities even hear about “bored apes”? Who is recommending that they buy one? Is this really the best thing any of them can think to do with their money and fame?
> technically, what you're purchasing is a record on the blockchain that assigns your blockchain address exclusive ownership of that image
Wrong. What you're purchasing is a record on the blockchain that assigns your blockchain address exclusive ownership of *the minting queue spot*. And minting is just an identifier in the queue.
Like when you go to the bank and you get the ticket to wait, that says #12432 in the queue? Same thing except that you actually purchase your queue ticket. That's minting.
It just so happens that this minting queue spot is resellable and just *happens* to have a visual representation (what people confuse with the NFT itself), for example an ape, etc.
There is absolutely no ownership/intelectual property delegation when an NFT is purchased.
If you own an NFT, you own the NFT, and NOT its visual representation.
That's all fine, but the value of that point in the queue is not linked to anything of value. Each NFT is like it's own fiat currency with one note and one holder. Since there is no centralization, it's value is arbitrary. Why does that matter? A fiat currency like the dollar is held and traded by many people, with value being liquid, universal, and divisible: it's value is based on how tradeable it is. Stocks are obviously based on the ability for a company to trade it's work for value, and art is valued by the cultural importance.
NFTs each can have their unique relative value with no cultural relevance. They exist in a vacuum. Unlike currency, it has no systemicly defined value, therefore no value to anyone.
Unlike stocks, they do not repreresent a system with the capacity to generate efficiency, mine resources, or exchange value.
Unlike art, there isn't some wealthy person or museum who would want to be the final owner... it is only bought to be sold.
NFTs generate nothing and have no value management.
Economic systems are zero sum... growth only occurs through increased efficiency of resource processing. When you make money from an NFT, someone will lose the equvilant value, somewhere and sometime.
An NFT is at best like trading around a box of cash. Why not just trade the cash within?
Contracting. The buy and sales of NFTs rely heavily on blockchain tech called "Smart Contracts". Code that continues to execute on the blockchain even after its initial transaction on the blockchain.
In the future, NFTs are used for identification verification systems linking banks to wallets, wallets to phones, phones to verifications, verifications to the image displayed by the NFT.
NFTs also allow for greater human experiences of typical human events. Concerts, Drving vehicles, taking tests, enjoying movies, watching activities or outdoor events. NFTs and Metaverse goggles/services will all intertwine to alter the human experience of traditional activities.
max, this is all about CAA, as you note. and it's also about their ability to create/own IP as agents, which historically they were not able to do. now...now they can. sort of. ish. (NB: i spent 25 years in hollywood, have friends at CAA and know whereof I speak)
Celebrities are increasingly active in venture, not just web3 investing. NFTs are part of this broader trend of VC engagement (I think).
Also, I’d add to your map that Paris Hilton is married to Carter Reum (of M13 VC), a LA based venture capitalist who is invested in River Financial and Lightng Labs, two blockchain/digital assets companies.
Yes, I think this is probably true — with NFTs, the same processes at work with celebrity venture investment (around attention, e.g.) are just made all the more explicit.
Can't believe I missed the Paris/M13 connection! Of course that's where she's heard about web3. It's a reminder that, especially as L.A.'s tech scene has grown in the last decade, there's a lot more social overlap between the entertainment and tech industries, which is only going to tighten the relationship between the two.
It’s not much different than Warren Buffett pictured with a can of Coca-Cola and claiming he drinks a one every day. The main difference here though is that Coca-Cola actually has to produce something tangible to sell. NFT is the epitome of maximizing profit efficiency. I mean, NFT infinity cheaper to produce than tulip.
"One of the funny things that the world of web3 seems intent on revealing is the extent to which the boundaries between concepts like "Ponzi scam," "pyramid scheme," "multi-level marketing," "conspiracy," and "just regular old financial capitalism working as intended" are not really as clear as we might like or hope."
LOL. What boundary? Who ever thought there was one?
Found anything related to record label Monstercat?
They've been pushing NFTs for quite a while now, before it became this huge thing, and keep doing so even when a major part of their community & artists are against it.
> technically, what you're purchasing is a record on the blockchain that assigns your blockchain address exclusive ownership of that image
Wrong. What you're purchasing is a record on the blockchain that assigns your blockchain address exclusive ownership of *the minting queue spot*. And minting is just an identifier in the queue.
Like when you go to the bank and you get the ticket to wait, that says #12432 in the queue? Same thing except that you actually purchase your queue ticket. That's minting.
It just so happens that this minting queue spot is resellable and just *happens* to have a visual representation (what people confuse with the NFT itself), for example an ape, etc.
There is absolutely no ownership/intelectual property delegation when an NFT is purchased.
If you own an NFT, you own the NFT, and NOT its visual representation.
That's all fine, but the value of that point in the queue is not linked to anything of value. Each NFT is like it's own fiat currency with one note and one holder. Since there is no centralization, it's value is arbitrary. Why does that matter? A fiat currency like the dollar is held and traded by many people, with value being liquid, universal, and divisible: it's value is based on how tradeable it is. Stocks are obviously based on the ability for a company to trade it's work for value, and art is valued by the cultural importance.
NFTs each can have their unique relative value with no cultural relevance. They exist in a vacuum. Unlike currency, it has no systemicly defined value, therefore no value to anyone.
Unlike stocks, they do not repreresent a system with the capacity to generate efficiency, mine resources, or exchange value.
Unlike art, there isn't some wealthy person or museum who would want to be the final owner... it is only bought to be sold.
NFTs generate nothing and have no value management.
Economic systems are zero sum... growth only occurs through increased efficiency of resource processing. When you make money from an NFT, someone will lose the equvilant value, somewhere and sometime.
An NFT is at best like trading around a box of cash. Why not just trade the cash within?
That just begs the question: what's the bloody point of it all?
https://www.poynter.org/reporting-editing/2009/why-begs-the-question-doesnt-mean-what-you-think-it-does/
Contracting. The buy and sales of NFTs rely heavily on blockchain tech called "Smart Contracts". Code that continues to execute on the blockchain even after its initial transaction on the blockchain.
In the future, NFTs are used for identification verification systems linking banks to wallets, wallets to phones, phones to verifications, verifications to the image displayed by the NFT.
NFTs also allow for greater human experiences of typical human events. Concerts, Drving vehicles, taking tests, enjoying movies, watching activities or outdoor events. NFTs and Metaverse goggles/services will all intertwine to alter the human experience of traditional activities.
"NFTs also allow for greater human experiences of typical human events."
LOL. The point of NFTs is the same as the point of all scams.
max, this is all about CAA, as you note. and it's also about their ability to create/own IP as agents, which historically they were not able to do. now...now they can. sort of. ish. (NB: i spent 25 years in hollywood, have friends at CAA and know whereof I speak)
Celebrities are increasingly active in venture, not just web3 investing. NFTs are part of this broader trend of VC engagement (I think).
Also, I’d add to your map that Paris Hilton is married to Carter Reum (of M13 VC), a LA based venture capitalist who is invested in River Financial and Lightng Labs, two blockchain/digital assets companies.
Yes, I think this is probably true — with NFTs, the same processes at work with celebrity venture investment (around attention, e.g.) are just made all the more explicit.
Can't believe I missed the Paris/M13 connection! Of course that's where she's heard about web3. It's a reminder that, especially as L.A.'s tech scene has grown in the last decade, there's a lot more social overlap between the entertainment and tech industries, which is only going to tighten the relationship between the two.
Check out the historical NFT movement. Are comments still a thing?
is this comment available for purchase
It’s not on a blockchain……yet
It’s not much different than Warren Buffett pictured with a can of Coca-Cola and claiming he drinks a one every day. The main difference here though is that Coca-Cola actually has to produce something tangible to sell. NFT is the epitome of maximizing profit efficiency. I mean, NFT infinity cheaper to produce than tulip.
This is good stuff. Visit /r/CryptoReality for more
"One of the funny things that the world of web3 seems intent on revealing is the extent to which the boundaries between concepts like "Ponzi scam," "pyramid scheme," "multi-level marketing," "conspiracy," and "just regular old financial capitalism working as intended" are not really as clear as we might like or hope."
LOL. What boundary? Who ever thought there was one?
"technically, what you're purchasing is a record on the blockchain that assigns your blockchain address exclusive ownership of that image"
LOL. No, you don't have "exclusive ownership of that image". You "own" a number; that's all.
wow just found this gold from february. would love an update as Moonpay is involved and the relationships / purchases are even more convoluted.
Found anything related to record label Monstercat?
They've been pushing NFTs for quite a while now, before it became this huge thing, and keep doing so even when a major part of their community & artists are against it.
Stoner Cats has Kutcher and Kunis on their website. They’re not hiding anything from you, you just weren’t paying attention.
Hey! That was a little sarcastic joke :)
A real test: how do Arcade Fire fit into that web?
Was really hoping there was some deep connection but having looked into it I think Gala Games just paid them a lot of money to play a concert...