So I just seen that the first ever Tweet was sold for 2.9million Euro.

AMKC

So is the World entering a period of complete and utter sturdiness. I mean how can someone own this. It's not physical it's a bit of code. Past week or a few weeks ago some online art too was sold for stupid money. So what is your take on all of this? Again this online art is just code and who is to say it will always be the same code. How can someone own something like this that does not physically exist?

Sonics2k

I'm not a conspiracy guy, but does anyone else think this is just a new form of money laundering? Like those blank canvasses that sell for millions of dollars.

Fake Scores

.

ancapailldorcha

AMKC wrote: »

So is the World entering a period of complete and utter sturdiness. I mean how can someone own this. It's not physical it's a bit of code. Past week or a few weeks ago some online art too was sold for stupid money. So what is your take on all of this? Again this online art is just code and who is to say it will always be the same code. How can someone own something like this that does not physically exist?

Apparently, the purchase was a certificate declaring legal ownership of the tweet. I suppose some would see it as a bit of modern history and I wouldn't be able to disagree with that. Everyone spends a bit here and there on questionable purchases but when it's the rich they tend to be a lot more noticeable due to the sums involved.

11521323

AMKC wrote: »

So is the World entering a period of complete and utter sturdiness. I mean how can someone own this. It's not physical it's a bit of code. Past week or a few weeks ago some online art too was sold for stupid money. So what is your take on all of this? Again this online art is just code and who is to say it will always be the same code. How can someone own something like this that does not physically exist?

Look up NFTs, that's your answer.

Gregor Samsa

AMKC wrote: »

How can someone own something like this that does not physically exist?

You can own lots of things - some of immense monetary value - that aren’t physical objects. Patents, trade marks and copyright being some examples.

Church on Tuesday

More money than sense.

Quantum Erasure

I wonder how much the first post on boards would go for? or facekickers 'who wants a kick in the face'?
I'd pay for that...

begbysback

I have infractions and mod warnings for sale, dm me for prices.

Cee-Jay-Cee

I don't actually believe anyone paid for it, its not something that has a monetary value however if it is true then its a sad reflection on the person who bought it, like imagine having so much money that your life (and money) has become so meaningless that you can pay an obscene amount of money for a non physical item...its actually pathetic.

11521323

11521323 wrote: »

Look up NFTs, that's your answer.

It’s still a belief system. The NFT represents a unique digital item. Great, but where is this tweet. Is it on Twitter’s database? It can’t be the tweet display which is clearly fungible and depends on who was following him then.

Cee-Jay-Cee

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

I don't actually believe anyone paid for it, its not something that has a monetary value however if it is true then its a sad reflection on the person who bought it, like imagine having so much money that your life (and money) has become so meaningless that you can pay an obscene amount of money for a non physical item...its actually pathetic.

Not a guy I’d feel sorrow for, or pity. I think it’s a stupid purpose but then again a lot of conspicuous consumption is.

fergiesfolly

Gucci are now selling virtual shoes.
You download a pair of shoes you designed after you pay a few €.
And then you look at them on your phone.

I imagine these will be for sale on some future version of ebay at some point in the future.

silverharp

begbysback wrote: »

I have infractions and mod warnings for sale, dm me for prices.

whoever got the first one might be a very rich man :pac:

AMKC

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

I don't actually believe anyone paid for it, its not something that has a monetary value however if it is true then its a sad reflection on the person who bought it, like imagine having so much money that your life (and money) has become so meaningless that you can pay an obscene amount of money for a non physical item...its actually pathetic.

Agreed and very sad. Think of all the poor people in the World they could have helped with that money. If I was rich I would be trying to make the World a better place for everyone and to better humankind not waste money on some stupid bit of code that only exists in virtual reality.

fergiesfolly wrote: »

Gucci are now selling virtual shoes.
You download a pair of shoes you designed after you pay a few €.
And then you look at them on your phone.

Awe now that is just utterly stupid. What is the point in buying shoes of you can not wear them? That is the purpose of shoes after all to wear them, to look good and feel good even if it is only for 30mins or an hour before you want to take them off because they hurt your feet. Me I can go for 3 hours sometimes longer depending on the shoe and what I am doing and of course the height of them.

11521323

Deleted User wrote: »

It’s still a belief system. The NFT represents a unique digital item. Great, but where is this tweet. Is it on Twitter’s database? It can’t be the tweet display which is clearly fungible and depends on who was following him then.

It's not all that different to physical items, most collectibles are valued and appraised based on a belief system. We only ascertain that X is authentic and Y is a replica because of expert opinion that carries the belief of the buyer in most cases.

silliussoddius

How much would Non Fappable Tokens sell for?