Post #4041439

2026-07-23 16:59 UTC

His brain doesn't actually believe in his "blue chip" assertion, you can kinda tell. He has to wind himself up a little bit before he can get out the phrase and then he stops momentarily to lick his lips as if they're already dry from nervousness. He's advising people to buy "at least two" of an NFT because you're gonna get emotionally attached...and then comes an even longer pause after saying that, as if he's realized that he's not sure what being emotionally attached to something actually feels like. It makes no sense, either. If one is actually genuinely emotionally attached to the artwork which an NFT supposedly holds, then...why not just make a private copy of that? (cont'd)

Replies (1)

@mxchara@seattle.pink 2026-07-23 17:08

There's one teensy lil problem with that: the NFT gambler (are there any NFT or #blockchain gamblers on the #fediverse? hey there, folks, you've all been swindled!) has bought into the premise that NFTs are somehow atomic, i.e. indivisible packets of artwork which have had the miraculous property of blockchain marketability stamped into them. This of course is outrageously false. NFTs contain nothing of value. The blockchain token itself might as well be a slip of paper with a serial number on it. The artwork exists only as a frangible link to something elsewhere. Copying that artwork separately for one's private archives instantly destroys the illusion that the NFTs are in fact atomic. (cont'd)

Open ##4041662