> It's kind of like saying there could be an infinite number of paintings, so why should Picassos be worth very much?
We could mint an infinite number of Picasso NFTs, though. None of them are the actual piece of art.
You could argue that one particular NFT is the official Picasso NFT because it was sold by the owners of the Picasso painting, but it’s still just a fancy hyperlink to a page that says “This is a Picasso NFT”.
NFTs are basically fancy blockchain transactions with a memo field that can say “This represents a Picasso painting” and we’re all supposed to believe that it means something.
The closest equivalent would be something like baseball cards. There is a market for baseball trading cards, but everyone is fully aware that they’re still just arbitrary prices of printed cardboard.
We could mint an infinite number of Picasso NFTs, though. None of them are the actual piece of art.
You could argue that one particular NFT is the official Picasso NFT because it was sold by the owners of the Picasso painting, but it’s still just a fancy hyperlink to a page that says “This is a Picasso NFT”.
NFTs are basically fancy blockchain transactions with a memo field that can say “This represents a Picasso painting” and we’re all supposed to believe that it means something.
The closest equivalent would be something like baseball cards. There is a market for baseball trading cards, but everyone is fully aware that they’re still just arbitrary prices of printed cardboard.