Everything is based on the value society gives something, if we all agree it has value then it goes, even BTC is just computer code but it has value as we say it has value, this also ties into the technology and how it can benefit us , but its interesting that society decides what has value not governments. I mean crypto punks is ugly art, but it has value because the community decides it does.
I think some of it is an economic bubble, some think NFts have artistic value. But this is still not the right thing for too many reasons, to set a price for An NFts Starting from the assessment of an expert, then availability in the market, Fomo or economic bubble that accompanies a trend.
Although at least there are a lot of Nft that have more stuff like P2E and P2W. So some have different reasons.
Hype gives the biggest value for NFTs right now imo. Back in January, when the hype was highest you could literally create the most basic “art” and make it sold out in Ethereum / Solana pretty fast.
I think the real values will be when we can use this NFTs as a part of a computer game. There will be a clear advantage of the ownership there.
For a few, simply the image can be a value. They look at them like they look at a picture, and consider it an art. But I believe this is not true for the pixel-like NFT-s, rather the well-detailed, high quality ones.
The way I understand it, I think the real value of an NFT being a unique collectible characterized by a certificate of authenticity. Still uncertain on the actual implementation or utility (rental contracts and stuff like that), but the way I see it, we’re at the early stages.
I think we need to do a better job of designing new rights attached to ownership.
For example, if I own the NFT then I have the rights to make an upscaled version of it in a metaverse game. I could ramble forever about why this is cool, but it can be designed for all sorts of market mechanisms to encourage content creation
2 Likes
Interoperability and self custody
I tend to hold a more pessimistic view on NFTs in terms of their valuation. I liken it to a house deed - the document assigns you ownership to your house, alongside some information (analogue: metadata). Fundamentally, the deed itself doesn’t have value, it’s the underlying house that holds value. The sense of ownership of the house really hinges heavily on the social buy-in of the system that issues the deed.
NFTs are cool in that they facilitate the transfer-of-information for ownership, but ultimately I think the valuation lies in the product behind the assignment of ownership. NFT hype is right now driven by geek excitement for the potential of better transfer of ownership (rightfully so), and implicitly the historical aspect if it becomes mainstream in the future, so slapping any product right now (images) and marketing the heck out of it works.
2 Likes
I feel the most value in the entire NFT space comes from frustration with current values and pioneer-perspective of a self-controlled value-system.
The fact alone, that you can easily transfer high-value assets/“paintings” to anyone in the world within seconds gives major advantage over traditional assets, that might take harm while being transported, might be stolen, burnt, etc.
1 Like