/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>29240284
I could make that in 5 minutes using paint, hope you got it for free OP

>>29240284
why'd you buy the nigger one

>>29240284
just copied that image, now I own it too

>>29240284
I made that pic

>>29240284
who that

>>29240284
I remember this shit
2017 as fuck

>>29240662
You don't own it, I do.
>>29240670
No you didn't
>>29240636
Racist
>>29240507
It's very valuable
>>29240746
A "Cryptopunk"
>>29240751
The older it is the more collectible it will be

>>29240284
you're IamDCinvestor?

ok

>>29241156
IamDCinvestor has one too I guess, mine is cooler though

>>29241152
I own it too, as I just copied your image.

>>29241582
But you don't own my copy. My copy is better.

>>29241156
>>29241384
I've looked into it and it appears IamDCinvestor has stolen my copy. I will be taking him to Kleros court.

This is money laundering and I have reported this thread to ATF

>>29240284
I saved it to my phone. I now own it as well.

>>29241726
Or maybe people just appreciate the art and want to own it? baka

>>29241814
It has an embedded virus lmao

>>29241152
>telling people racist in this board
fuckign newfag, fuck off already
the board is fuckinf filled with pajeets and redditfag

>>29241866
Yikes... Do better.

>>29240284
Dcinvestor is such a salty fuck over this bsc happening

>>29241915
Have an updoot kind stranger

>>29241915
NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER

>>29240284
My NFT is cooler

>>29242157
*Gives gold star*

nice i got one aswell

>>29242222
checked, I have that one too
>>29242392
Still like my copy more, but pretty cool anon

>>29240284
Screencapped

NFTS!!!!!

>>29241152
did you buy the nigger one because you’re a nigger lover? you know it’s worth 3/5th a white one, sorry you got scammed

>>29242536
It's more valuable because black is beautiful

>>29241627
I just got it for free lmfao you paid for that photo?

>>29242625
Only 10 ETH, it's worth 57 now

>>29242597
I think we got a real life nigger in this thread, the day of the rope will come soon

You gotta get with the times.

>>29242813
that's badass, how much eth for it?

Amazing that even in crypto, people don't get NFTs yet. If I offered you the Mona Lisa or 5,000 perfect copies of the Mona Lisa, which would you choose? Why did you make that choice?

>>29243173
You can't screenshot the Mona Lisa. As far as art NFTs, I can see some value to the historically interesting ones because people might think it's neat after blockchain has dominated the world and they can show they have the one of the first example of NFTs. But the vast majority will be worthless.

NFTs that do something and are required for access to something could be interesting. I guess people could make something that only allows Cryptopunk owners, could be cool.

>>29242954
These just started dropping yesterday. You can still get new ones for .125 eth. rarible.com/pixawizards

>>29243672
Sweet, just got mine

>>29243822
Kek

>>29240284
I bought this one yesterday. It belongs to me. Rate out of 10

>>29243931
Too left

>>29243931
>>29243959
6/10, hope you didn't pay more than 20 eth for that

>>29243471
I'm sorry to say this anon, but you will live to regret your lack of foresight.

>>29243931
Pretty close to mine. Mine has slightly more pixels I think.

Rate my rare Zangief

>>29243173
>>29243471
Got to say I don't really get the fuss about NFTs. I can see that the tech is potentially useful and it might have some industry applications, although I'm not sure what exactly. Actually, the first thing that comes to mind is that it could be used to prevent copyright infringement, to 'prove' that the movie/album/book/whatever you have is a unique copy and you paid for it. Is that where we're headed? I can't help feeling that blockchain and NFTs and all these techs that are currently being used for decentralised goals are inevitably going to be taken over and used to make the world a more dystopian horrible place before long.

>>29240284
Wtf are these ?
Is this just some pixel art that you gought with crypto isn't this a scam ?

>>29244050
You could explain why. I don't think the concept is entirely worthless, NFTs themselves are neat. But people paying hundreds of thousands for shoddy pixel art to say they own the image is confusing.

>>29240284
i just saved it now what

>>29244228
>Actually, the first thing that comes to mind is that it could be used to prevent copyright infringement
This is what I was thinking. If you could represent a song or something as an NFT for copyright purposes that would be useful.
>inevitably going to be taken over and used to make the world a more dystopian horrible place before long.
Possibly. It'll be better in some ways, worse in others like most technological changes.

>>29243822
dubs and kek'd

I'd post my rare zangief but the gif is too big. Here's poison instead.

>>29244246
NFTs are not just for art. They are proof of ownership for every asset, and will only increase as the world becomes more digitized. Art is an easy visual example, but copyright and ownership laws in general are rapidly trending that way. Cryptopunks I particular have value because they were the first NFTs, the first of a quickly expanding, entirely new asset class. Their value lies in their historic precedence. They will necessarily increase as the space matures. Mark Cuban and Chamath have bought in. Hedge funds are beginning to acquire NFTs. Christie's is about to hold an NFT auction of Beeple's first 5000 works. This is happening whether anons understand it or not, and it is early enough for one to truly get a foothold in it, unlike most crypto. I'm trying to help you. I hope you do your research and don't miss the chance.

One thing that's interesting is the image in OP will always be associated with IamDCinvestor because he bought it and can prove he bought it. I don't know what that's worth, but it's interesting.

>>29244609
Seems like we're on the same page actually. I don't think NFTs are worthless overall, just that most of the art ones are worthless or will be. Other use cases exist like you mentioned. I'll probably buy an NFT index or something if I wanted to buy into this trend.

>>29244790
Any NFT art minted this early will have value. Literally anything bought before the mainstream buys in will increase purely by virtue of timestamp. NFTX/Index funds are cutting edge for the space, though, and a good buy.

>>29243672
the thing I don't understand is; if I wanted to transfer into some WETH to buy this, would that not cost me $100 in gas fees for something thats worth that little?

>>29240284
>>29242392
>>29243931
>>29244148

>>29240284
mines worth 1/3 more

>>29245043
I just used eth. The whole thing cost me about $100 in gas.

>>29243173
I’ll go with the cheaper one cause they look the same. I don’t collect things cause I’m not an egotistical faggot

>>29242718
yes, yes, grandpa. the day of the rope is coming soon. now take your nap.

>>29245933
But again why would you pay something that you can get for free ?
you can litteraly inspect the page of rarible and download the file

>>29246255
its on the blockchain so its the contract with the image that matters together retard.
Its like genuine art but ofcourse you can make identical copies.
Still not the OG artpiece.

And you can also keep selling it for a higher price after buying it so there is value in it

>>29246255
here is a use case for you:
do you think there is buyer for a skin that some e-celeb used in a game?

What’s the biggest NFT network? Cause I do see proof of ownership being huge down the line replacing deeds and shit for a house

>>29246747
4 primary marketplaces, though all are focused on art as of now: Rarible, which is open access, and SuperRare, Maker's Place, and NiftyGateway, all three of which are submission/acceptance only.

>>29240284
these are not valuable, it's literally all wash trading either for money laundering or trying to sucker in retards to buy in. although that's not totally different from regular erc20 tokens i guess

>>29246401
yes but it will still be the same, a real sculpture will age, have an story but here,
If I download the image i have the exact same as the buyer, this why I find it stupid, there is no real value in your copy itself, because yes it tells that the copy have been bought by you and you are the only legal owner but what if there is 100k exact copy of the art wouldn't it affect the worth of it ? and if someone modify the image and change 4px and then send it on the blockchain to get his token and sell it ? what will happen ?
If tomorrow a we invent a clonning machine and clone mona lisa will the clone have the same value ? less ? will the original loose value ? why would someone buy something that everyone have ?
All this seems really weird to me.

>>29241713
top kek. Be careful the Kleros jeets may favor him, I fear you will not get a fair trial ser.

>>29247189
So you would want the literal first edition charizard pokemon card even tho identical ones exist?

bruh

>>29246601
Yes, I forgot that the world is full of retards , but in csgo some dudes managed to make copy of the skins and sold them at the exact same worth, making 30k in under a week, and even if the buyers would have known that these where copies they would still have buy them 40% there price.

>>29247615
Yes but again physical object are subject to age, png's are not.
I think I'm just not the type of customer for these, or atleast not now, not until I really see peoples making money with it (by second hands)

>>29247723
duping protection is not the main selling point of NFTs, value comes from previous ownership/time of ownership. at least i think so