SIGforum.comMain PageThe Lounge How a 10-second video clip sold for $6.6 million new market for NFTs or digital assets **Update** JPG file just sold for $69 million by Christy's
Nonetheless, auction house Christie’s has just launched its first-ever sale of digital art – a collage of 5,000 pictures, also by Beeple – which exists solely as an NFT.
Bids for the work have hit $3 million, with the sale due to close on March 11.
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” - John Adams
Posts: 29408 | Location: In the red hinterlands of Deep Blue VA | Registered: June 29, 2001
Originally posted by architect: How much can I get for a picture of my ass?
That depends, is it fungible or non-fungible?
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” - John Adams
Posts: 29408 | Location: In the red hinterlands of Deep Blue VA | Registered: June 29, 2001
Kinda cray, but not that cray. In a bunch of different markets, things have value purely because other people agree that they have value. (The only really cray part is how someone would be willing to pay that many millions for what is essentially "bragging rights".)
I mean, look at how people spend real money for stuff like cosmetic skins for your character in a video game, furniture for your video game house, make believe currency for the multiplayer game world, etc. People buy/sell/trade/flip those too. Some of that even appreciates in value. But those have no value other than showing off to your friends online.
And then there's the obvious correlation to cryptocurrency, which has no intrinsic value and relies solely on the collective agreement that it's worth something.
Plus, look at non-digital correlations, like sports cards or stamps. They're cheap pieces of cardboard or paper. But certain ones have value, because other people agree that they're valuable, usually due to scarcity.
Or physical modern art. It's $10 worth of canvas and a few random splashes of paint. But they can sell for millions, because enough other modern art connoisseurs agree that certain splashes of paint are worth millions.
Hell, most modern currency is the same in a way, just on a much, much larger scale and backed by some massive institutions, governments, and laws.
In all of those cases, as silly as it may be value wise, you still have something tangible that you can hold in your hands. If the electricity goes off, my baseball cards still exist. If my computer is hacked, my paper money still exist. If a nuke takes out the internet, my artwork still hangs on my wall.
Originally posted by architect: I just checked, I can find no fungus on it. Thanks for your interest.
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” - John Adams
Posts: 29408 | Location: In the red hinterlands of Deep Blue VA | Registered: June 29, 2001
I'm not even all that sure about "money in the bank". Between inflation and electronic tomfoolery, I place more trust in hard goods than a savings account.
Be careful when following the masses. Sometimes the M is silent.
Posts: 15594 | Location: Downeast Maine | Registered: March 10, 2010
Reading the thread about the surgeon and traffic court had me thinking just how stupid can people be? I think the subjects of this thread have raised the bar.
Posts: 11818 | Location: SWFL | Registered: October 10, 2007
Originally posted by Aeteocles: I don't know, the fella seems pretty smart. He made a fair bit of money buying it at $67k and selling it at $6.6 million.
I'm sure someone thought he was stupid for spending a $67k for a 10 second piece of digital art.
Yeah, as silly as it all sounds, legal profits like that are what all of us dream of. I keep hoping to get my turn at dreaming a whopper like that up and making it happen.
Nonetheless, auction house Christie’s has just launched its first-ever sale of digital art – a collage of 5,000 pictures, also by Beeple – which exists solely as an NFT.
Bids for the work have hit $3 million, with the sale due to close on March 11.
<I accidentally wrote over the original post which explained these non fungible assets>
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” - John Adams
Posts: 29408 | Location: In the red hinterlands of Deep Blue VA | Registered: June 29, 2001
The concept is an interesting one for digital goods. Watch the documentary on "who the F is Jackson Pollack" and you will see the frustration of the art industry.
No one can absolutely prove who painted it because its provenance is unknown. So a 50million dollar painting was bought at a 2nd hand store for a few dollars. The documentary really exposed the whole thing as an elective snobbery. There was real evidence to point to its authenticity but most experts do not accept it.
Now to the excitement of the digital art, it theoretically is impossible to NOT be able to prove the 'provenance' of the original piece of art because its 'key' is encrypted.
The irony is, how do you display it? People travel and pay a fee to see the Mona Lisa but how do you display a digital piece of art that frankly, you can download from the internet?
Sadly, art just became more about an encrypted locker than it is about the quality of the art. And for some reason I find that incredibly depressing.
This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we'll be lucky to live through it. -Rear Admiral (Lower Half) Joshua Painter Played by Senator Fred Thompson
Posts: 3680 | Location: Central Virginia | Registered: November 06, 2006
"It did not really matter what we expected from life, but rather what life expected from us. We needed to stop asking about the meaning of life, and instead to think of ourselves as those who were being questioned by life – daily and hourly. Our answer must consist not in talk and meditation, but in right action and in right conduct. Life ultimately means taking the responsibility to find the right answer to its problems and to fulfill the tasks which it constantly sets for each individual." Viktor Frankl, Man's Search for Meaning, 1946.
Posts: 20180 | Location: The Free State of Arizona - Ditat Deus | Registered: March 24, 2011
Logical fallacies abounding in this thread. Just because someone made money doesn’t prove anything, Barnum comment holds just as much sway. I get that art is somewhat in the eye of the beholder but this is stupid. Unlike a Mona Lisa where you can buy a wonderful print, a beautiful photograph, even a quality painted copy, you still end up with a version that isn’t quite like the original. No matter how good the copy. This thing, and I’m being gracious with that term, can literally be downloaded as an exact copy. As for provenance, who cares if I printed my thesis on my printer or your printer? Where is any value whatsoever in provenance of electronic art?
I also always suspect some form of money laundering or payoff when I hear stuff like this. Like paying AOC or the Obamas 10 million dollars for a product that won’t get a return on the money.
Maybe I’m just paranoid. Or too old to understand. Or something. Or they are fucking idiots.
Posts: 7540 | Location: Florida | Registered: June 18, 2005
SIGforum.comMain PageThe Lounge How a 10-second video clip sold for $6.6 million new market for NFTs or digital assets **Update** JPG file just sold for $69 million by Christy's
