Why are NFTs so Ugly? 

@@MikyleY Wasn't that what op said, though?

the coloring book itself is shitty as well

i personally would compare it to some kind of dress up game from 2010

@@Angel3x111 It's basically picrew art but for cishets.

@@MikyleY sure you can still make aesthetically pleasing, original art, but if you're making 10,000 slightly different variations of the same template, you're going to quickly run out of ones that don't look ugly or uncanny

well, thats kind of everything today "how much money can it make", videogames, art, medicine, prisons, people, EVERYTHING

The whole idea behind most NFTs is that it´s a scam

@@Lenn869 Most NFT’s don’t even store the picture behind the NFT on the blockchain. They just store a hyperlink to where that picture is on the regular internet.

yeah, that's the biggest turnoff for me. even if i make good art and put it on there, if it doesn't have some kind of valuable rareness to it, its still worthless to the people on those sites. So often times you either need to be famous, or offer something that proves it can make money (bored apes, crypto punk ect ect). It reminds me a lot of other art circles that already exist where artists will charge a lot for their art simply because millionaires like them (you should charge a living, but I do think its possible to overcharge on purpose). It also doesn't help that as soon as NFTs got talked about, literally every company i can think of has jumped into it, so it feels more like a marketing gimmick to me at this point then a thing that helps out artists. I don't think that this is inherently bad but something just feels weird when its literally all of them doing it at pretty much the same time, trying to sell something. The last thing i want in an artist space haveing to compete with multi-million and multi-billion dollar companies. It definitely works as a marketing idea, but its for sure not fit for all types of artists. and there's also other things about i don't like but this is already long, lmao.

Welcome to capitalism, baby. Where art comes to die in favour of profits.

Good ending

To call them a phenomena is wrong, they were a fad

It is important to recognize that the NFT market is still alive, since the environmental impact and harm to artists continues. ... but yeah, thank goodness the NFT market is not necessarily succeeding.

NFT’s = The pogs of the investment world!

Watching this after the recent news is funny

And the groceries have no uses, and have risk of getting wiped out if the store decide to shut down

Not even, it’s the “you wouldn’t download a car” thing. The actual good isn’t kept by the grocery store, it’s kept by everyone XD.

I own more than 1000 NFTs, none of them are those expensive ugly apes. You have no idea what you are talking about

@@kevinf8439 you just proved my point

Maybe try to think for yourself or at least do research. You know, you don't have to have an opinion about everything, especially if you know nothing about it.

@@kevinf8439 Ok, Kevin.

@@kevinf8439 is this a troll or is it someone who wasted money for some ugly picture that you can screen shot lol.

"I'll pay you in exposure"

i think because that 5+ ethereum will give them more in return while that $25 commission is just an investment not an asset

Stop giving me ideas

Its because they dont care about art, and especially dont care about artists. They are making an investment in themselves, and their egos.

@@cecilenaught you can say that with traditional art.thats how a fucking red canvas can make more than a professional artist who spent years mastering the craft.lots of the people who buy them resell it for more to make a profit the next year

Yay :D

lol

Hate to say it, but you´re right. I don´t like furry art but I have to admit it is always really high quality and it looks like people put a lot of effort into it

@@Axl-ng1yj it's made for zoophiles unfortunately, people want to have sex with the poor foxes

It’s a pity it’s used for such a degenerate purpose

@@Coelophysis-yv9lj Not all the time, but then again, it is peoples interests.

@@WillatHastings Gross

Rare pepes were also just cooler and funnier

also their carbon footprint doesn't twist the atmosphere's balls to cause testicular torsion, so that's a plus too.

@@awe9217 That is a sentence I never thought would hear

@@beesindisguise5375 Just wait until they make NFTs out of them, I can guarantee they're gonna happen

@@marianokaz1503 actual rare pepe collector dont want to decrease their collection rarity by making it an NFT

That is a problem with the consumers, not anyone else.

@@SenhorAlien "American politics is a problem with the voters, not anyone else." _God forbid_ someone calls the system *bad,* because it's easily exploitable! The gall! The _audacity!_

@@L3X1N hammer and sickle solve all

And there's still that issue of being able to copy or even screenshot them. "Non-fungible" my ass

Ngl those monkey/lion nfts look like they were made with dress up apps

i was literally looking for this to talk me out of it because i've been thinking about it lately since i had the opportunity and i kinda know it would be quick needed money but all this environmental stuff is to heavy and it make me feel so uneasy, i'm pretty sure i don't want this for my art

Glad to get the perspective of someone who didnt immediately hate nfts the second they heard about it :)

PROUD AS HELL OF YOU!!

Speaking as an artist myself, it is a morally and creatively bankrupt field. Glad to watch the market crash and burn.

@@atherissquimera5778 I'm an NFT artist on 2 chains : one is entirely carbon neutral, the other's energy usage is the same as the average american house hold. :)

True

once every new moon

@@xton4561 I’m gonna be that guy and say a new moon occurs every month

@@BlueGreenGlobe I though that was the intent. He posts videos once a month or so.

@@bluishwolf kind of kind of not, it’s not super inconsistent though which I’m glad for. But yea I just thought it was a *error* with the “once in a blue moon” phrase and not intentional so my bad.

As I mentioned before the original video got taken down, they're the equivalent of those flash games that allow you to design and dress up a blank figure into a character of your own, but completely lack the charm that made those types of games work in the first place.

@@DragonRagovi Oh, you mean dollmakers and avatar makers. I use those all the time. Yeah, I agree, it's like that, mixed with the vibe of ai generation like artbreeder.

@@DragonRagovi woooaahh you're right it is like that, oof, times they are a changin'

@@DragonRagovi *RinmaruGames flashbacks*

@@Limacinablues now that’s a name I haven’t seen in years

These people wouldn't know decency and integrity if it bit the square in the ass

I’m sorry

Don’t care. I use John Lennon to market my work, fuck my life. I’d rather use all of the Beatles as Fucking skin puppets on stage than wind up as another fruitless slave to the system

@@TowerArcanaCrowintegrity is doing the same thing if no one is watching. I don’t give a fuck who watches, I do what I do.

Sure, everyone can agree that using the deceased for personal profit is in bad taste, but it's hard to explain *why* it's bad, how it harms anyone. Saying "let them rest in peace", seemingly appealing to some idea of life after death, isn't a satisfying explanation for me.

How ironic that Non Fungible Tokens are perhaps the least true to their name of any “token” there is. Why did I phrase it like that? Anyway, what I mean is they are NOT anywhere near true to their name.

GAGAGAGAGAGA! I will now count to 3 and then I am still the unprettiest RU-vidr of all time. 1...2...3. GAGAGAGAGAGA!!! Thank you for your attention, dear ide

@@AxxLAfriku I love to see you here, Lord AxxL

@@AxxLAfriku I'd say you're annoying for promoting your shit but you don't justify art thieves stealing art from a dead person and profiting them, at least not publicly.

STAN LEE WAS DONE WRONG!

@@AxxLAfriku ooooh typical axxl :)

As a NFT artist. I agree. I wish there was more creative mind sets in the NFT community. That’s why I draw my NFT different and not some ugly patterns. I’m just starting out but still.

@@ConductorWeHaveAProblem can you please explain to me why? Also I want a peaceful conversation. Please don’t call me a problem if you have no idea who I am.

@@ConductorWeHaveAProblem and I ask a genuine question.

@@Lucyfer1012 Hi problem

@@Lucyfer1012 hi problem

I feel bad saying this but I just found out about here through this video. I instantly went over to Instagram and looked at everything she made. And God it's so beautiful 🥹

And it has the added benefit of letting your srt be effortlessly stolen and being robbed of the money you should have gotten for it! :D

and its more original and cheaper,

Paying people for their labor =/= paying people for their art.

@@silvermushroom-gamifyevery6430 what labor do you pay your artists for besides creating the sodding artV

@@BlazingKhioneus - The service of creating art to the client's specifications, in contrast to scarce art products that the artist doesn't have to create each and every instance of, that NFTs allow for in the digital space.

ownership is something that i think art is naturally at odds with - art is about freedom, inspiration, and often about spitting in the face of our current copyright system. Trying to make art less free and more about money is not good for artists in my opinion.

When the trend started, it SOUNDED good, great even. But now it morphed into this fucking abomination that i cannot come to terms with. some of my seniors actually sell individual pieces for like 50k+ as NFT tho, so good for them i guess.

@@mjfromjersey True that. The copyright system was once important to enable the existence of artists in a free market and shifted power over art from the nobility (which acted as patrons) to the bourgeoisie. The internet and modern forms of art transactions like commissions or crowdfunding have enabled artists to exist beyond the necessity for copyright and shifts power away from the markets to the actual recipients of art. Especially musicians and artists are thereby freed from their extreme dependence on the good will of the market keepers, who take their power from being able to mass-produce or mass-market products and are a side-effect of the copyright system.

@Mark O'Brien I totally agree, I think people are too obsessed with copyright law and ownership of art, especially since it's digital

Ultimately to me the fundamental issue with NFTs and crypto/blockchain in general, even beyond scams, art theft, environmental damage, toxic "communities", unregulated speculation, and all of the other negative externalities that are already enough to make me refuse to touch any of this with a twelve-foot pole, is that none of the benefits being touted hold water. Either they're things that can already be done without blockchain, things that need some shift in how things are done beyond just adding blockchain to the mix, things that are just a worse version of an existing thing, an outright falsehood that NFTs don't actually do in any measurable way, and/or things that aren't even desirable to begin with. It's all an attempt to commodify and make money off of the vague idea of ownership, a giant name-the-stars scam that even if some people can turn a profit it all comes from something even more fake than the actual economy (which is still fake, but crypto just leans into the fakeness instead of doing anything to fix it). You can't fix the problems of capitalism with more capitalism, you can't solve the issues with fiat currency by making a new fiat currency with more problems baked into it and no safeguards to prevent the issues you're claiming to avoid from just staking in at less risk of losing the investment if the new system fails than the people you claim to want to empower. Blockchain is a solution in search of a problem; crypto/NFTs invent and exaggerate problems and then completely fail to solve even the real ones they identify. It's all less than worthless, even if it fizzles out and has a negligible greater-scheme impact, because it distracts from actual attempts to solve these problems, poisons the well of further attempts that might be more altruistic in intention with the stain of an-cap idiocy, and even if we only use more "eco-friendly" crypto, it's all an energy drain that makes it harder to effectively shift the power grid to renewable resources than it already is. Just... I hate it all and I'm tired.

Awh, sucks to hear that had happened to you, but don't give up on it. Just be more cautious. I think at your age these kinds of mistakes are more frequent, but remember that each mistake has the potential to make you a stronger person as long as you have the right mindset! Also, it may help to have adult/parental supervision if you're in some kind of business, even if it's art. Someone who can more easily spot something suspicious about a commission and understands the web trends would go a long way.

@@reazulzannah738 I live in poverty and the people in my life capable of that work 24/7. I'm 14 now also haha. I've been on the internet my entire life really and am actually working on using things like blender to sharpen my skills. In the past month I've really been learning about suspicion offers ect. Nfts were newer on my fyp when I got that offer so that's why I didn't recognize it sadly. Not to mention I still don't understand them completely.

@@reazulzannah738 ty for commenting :)

Just make your own nft?

@@Gigachad-mc5qz whatttt?....

Qinni was such an inspiration for all artist in the 2010s im happy her name is always spoken and remembered

and she was such a good digital artist, I felt my heart cracking

I relate. I don't know she was dead until i saw this video and i had been following her on RU-vid and Instagram for years. I can't believe it slipped passed me

God, I had even forgotten it's been a couple years since she died. I never really followed her, but I recognized her work when I first heard about her death. I'd heard about the NFTs before this but didn't automatically connect the name Qinni to her, though I recognized it and suspected it was likely her. Also, her brother who now manages her artwork commented on this video.

same situation here, i legit want to cry rn, remembering everything... but also seeing ppl do this.

I'd call them vultures but vultures actually are ecologically important. I'd call them body snatchers but at least body snatchers contributed to the advance of medicine. Even graverobber somehow seems too good for them

What an absolute b***h move. Surely someone could get in legal trouble for impersonation of stuff like that. Hope whoever that guy is, gets in serious trouble. I'll be praying on their downfall.

@@paulmahoney7619 Preach

i didnt know anything about her or her art until i watched this vid and i legit want to cry rn

Simple answer : hoarding a 'limited supply' token means that anyone wanting to buy the token will have to buy from the previous owner, at a higher price than the hoarder paid for it, in essence, making the hoarder rich. This is just a greater fool scheme, where profit of any person depends on finding a 'bigger fool' who is willing to pay increasingly exorbitant price for the useless good

This was Qinni, her brother had to ask people to share who stole his sister’s works. And her close friend? Started selling NFTS……and flopped anyway. It was sad.

Trying to peddle NFTs using people who passed away should have consequences in my oppinion. How severe and harsh I leave up to debate but defiling someone's legacy this way is utterly disgusting.

Y'know you could just make a tree in her grave and let it grow there (Jk thats impratical)

I see more negatives than positives with the misuse of this tech. Seeing despicable people across the fucking sea in a little fucking den pull this kind of shit is infuriating, the straw that broke the camels fucking back

You know, there was a scene from wall street that reminds me of all the art theft, especially stealing a well loved artist who inspired many. The guy that made the speech stated "Greed is good, greed works" and stuff like that. I guess that was the foreshadowing of the creation of nfts.

Man up you 😺

they are high class because they were one of the first nft collections to be made. there is a reason. Why some things are valuable if they are ugly? bcs they are old or rare. Take any old painting that is worth millions. you dont have problem with that?

@@sebastian2072 both arguments works on bored ape, its a fuckin mass produced program-made products that are not good enough for it to be sold in tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars, heck atleast commission some artists to do it like card game makers like pokemon or vanguard or gacha game companies with their hundreds of characters. however i also understand that the community stuff like the yacht club and the community system behind it is the one that makes the value of the "art", and it took a lot of effort to make the community grow. but please can't you guys atleast just pay a team of artists to make your arts? ofcourse it will cost some money but you can still profit from those arts and it will legitimize the fuckin cost of it (heck it maybe can make the value much higher than these program made stuff). program made "arts" like that is just too greedy and is putting a bad name on yourself and is like spitting at artists who hone their skills their whole lives on their craft. and by paying a whole team of artists you are also making a good contributions to society by providing more jobs to others too.

@@ssrbgangimaribotan6thofthe12 its not greedy, it would take years to make 10k pictures individually. Its not about the art. People are in this market to make money. People buy bored apes for 200k bcs they believe they will be in x amount of time worth y amount of money. Its not greedy. And btw ,who said that those actually good artist cant make collections. You clearly dont understand this market. Its not all about the art. You just sound stupid trying to argue about things you dont know. Why the first edition charizard is worth 200-400k dollars? Why arent u hating them? They didnt make some good art. Its a fucking printed picture on a paper that goes for hundred thousands of dollars. Go hate them. Nft is a technology thru y can finally prove ownership of something. There was no way until now to prove something that u own it. Now there is. Thru blockchain. You understand that in 10 years crypto/nfts blockchain technology will be everywhere.

The funny thing is I don't see the Ape as being bored but more rather as something that's so dead inside it's like you are looking at the one who orginally created and spread the idea of NFT's.

@@thebandofbastards4934 keep hating bro. U will regret that u didnt get in sooner

Sickening is a gruesome understatement.

Someone asked me if they could sell some of my pixel art as NFTs. I said no. They said nothing after that. I'm worried they'll ignore my saying no. NFTs are an unregulated lawless wasteland and art theft is rampant. The weasels that use NFTs will use whatever asset they can get their grubby hands on to make quick money, with no respect for the buyers, the artists, or even the dead.

While you see this as Pyramid Scheme, I see it as Speculation.

@@JSSMVCJR2.1 It's both.

​@@JSSMVCJR2.1 Whoever made the NFT art gets royalties every time their art gets sold. They need to find a few people to buy they art. Then those people need to find more people willing to buy their NFT's to sell them at a higher price. Etc, etc. "Invest in my NFT! All you need to do is find more people to sell it to and you'll be rich in no time!" Especially with the increase in fractional ownerships of NFT's, this makes it textbook definition of a pyramid scheme in my book.

Okay, so I have one question regarding all of this. If your art isn't for sale and is uploaded online, do you have an issue with someone making it their profile picture?

Fun fact. A car (The 1963 Ferrari 250 GTO) was sold for over 70 million dollars at an auction. Supposedly there are only 39 of them in existence. It makes sense, you and 38 other people own that car, no one else can ever hope to get it, and few will even be lucky enough to ever see it. So out of 8000000 only somewhere around 0.0004875% of the population, owns one. And that's only gonna grow in value the older it gets, since it surviving and being functional for that long ups the rarity even more. But of course, this isn't really about making money, unlike the pictures of apes ... it's about putting money in something where you're so rich that you can toss away 70 million on a single car. Do I think something that isn't a rare and very high quality item should reach such values? Like a coin that doesn't even exist? No, never, it should have more justification to the worth. But maybe I'm just missing that justification.

fr, strange times

It's double think from 1984

Thank Fortnite for ruining a generation

heck card games like pokemon and vanguard has better justifications for valuable collectibles because they actually commissions real artists to make their stuff and some even have lores and science about it. not something that are mass produced by programs just so they can earn money, atleast put some effort on making it "rare" bruh.

praise be and may they never come back!

just because those uglies are most popular, doesn't really mean proper artist don't want to have anything to do with them, there's lot of artists with legit talent and skills that stayed in NFTs... I found a lot of artists I previously had no clue about because of NFTs... there's always some good to be seen...

@@ceasarcruz8312 I mean yeah, I was more generalizing than anything. This video alone has shown there are actually talented artists minting their own artwork, but it seems like that's the outlier. I see job listings on websites like ArtStation almost daily from companies looking for artists to make artwork for their NFTs. Basically, they put the cart before the horse, making NFTs without images to associate with them. I think that shows who's most invested in this concept. If it was REALLY about artists making their own money without a middle man, there wouldn't be so many NFT companies BECOMING middle men.

@@ERAeternal Yeah, it's annoying to see that instead of trying to change and make the business more decentralized so it would be more fair to everyone, it still seems like its going the same exact direction, and it's about people exploiting others for the profit. And those who get the most are not the most skilled/ hard working ones, but those who are best at marketing and with most connections..and it's so clear to see that instead of helping creatives they're just using them for making more money and crippling them. And majority of people who buy it don't even do it because they appreciate the art itself, but rather because they see it as opportunity to make more money. Like..well, this one looks decent enough so maybe I'll be able to re-sell it for much more. Yet, I believe the whole concept of NFT isn't that bad, but it still lacks some things to make it more useful. They already work on an AI that will mint a token within a picture pixels so then you could scan it and get all the info about who's the owner, the history of transactions etc. So that would prevent people from stealing other people's arts since the artists ownership would be embodied into the art itself. Kind of like invisible watermark. Also , I believe it's a very nice concept that the original artist will get some % of the money Everytime their NFT is resold by others. So there's lots of good that can come out of it, but in current state it's still very chaotic and it probably need some time to develop.

@@ERAeternal opportunists always show up when there's money to be made, I hate it too...

Yes!!

That's the thing.. those in media - that is often _their_ art too. No one is actually undermining your artisticness, but because you seek some sort of other validation and reward you are liable to be victimised by that or victimise yourself by it.

​@@tonyrandall3146 I get where you're coming from but besides drawing the assets for it it's just randomly generated and depending on how many there are, less work. Not to mention they're getting way more money than a small commission-taking artist gets in a year with one drawing :/

"Art"s primary purpose today is money laundering, NFTs let poor people do that also.

@@Bone_guy are you....? You do realise.....???????? You know what I'm not even gonna tell yah

I feel bad that modern art makes people believe that people in the modern age can't make good art. I've seen so many amazing artists on Twitter and am blown away with the art people can do with modern tech. I sympathize with you and all artist. This entire monitized modern art craze is spitting on art entirely

These people have no idea how artists actually work and make money. They always bring up the fine art gallery system when 99% of artists don't go anywhere near it.

Think they're probably talking about services like PayPal and Patreon, which have been known to screw artists over from time to time.

I also dont get the decentralization point as a pro. Like, how is making it with little to no accountability a good thing

@@apollo8447 I think ideally it would mean the art would be uncensorable, unable to be taken down if it was banned in a country that censors art. Just like torrenting tho, bad actors abuse it to the point where it's more prevalent than the people using it for good, whistleblowers, archivists, etc. Then again, artists could just make torrents of their art to make it uncensorable so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It is a bullshit PR lie. The internet already cut out the middle man for artists.

Yep currently there isn’t much utility in them exept as a status symbol but as we see crypto games that use nfts I think it will change for the better

@@randomboii9166 There will be use for the technology, sure. But those tokens purchased with no real purpose in mind? Why should they gain value?

That's not an issue. In fact, everything is like that

@@randomboii9166 Crypto games are just the same thing. They are quickly made cash grabs that are for idiots who buy into making money fast with their *unique* things. We already have thousands of ways to sell and buy game assets and tech without the need for nft stocks.

Does anyone know what the difference between and NFT and a commissioned digital art piece? Besides the fact that the commission is better in every way?

and also how horrible they are for the enviroment

@@chillfactory9000 Actually, thats seemingly the first thing most people will mention in discussions, but that could just be my experience. Now that im thinking about it, even when it's being brought up, no one really brings up exact numbers or analogous examples of how much energy is consumed. They'll just say "it's bad for the environment" and never expound on it, like they're just being a mouth-piece for some rhetoric, which in turn, disengages my interest in that part of the issue. I had no idea that Ethereum consumed more energy than a small country.

@@memepolice6624 it's hear-say really, but it's seems to be true...

I mean since most of these NFTBros don't care about the artistical value and just in it for the money(and they're the most annoying), people tend to go against that idea first to show their actual argument and purpose of profiting from a flawed system and sugarcoating it up with the idea of owning digital assets, I mean that's how I go about it anyways

@@nise6699 I just find it funny how people meme about screenshotting NFTs but they're not even worth that lol

Worst part is: You don't even know if some of those stars are even still burning out there. Could've been long dead for all we know and that "star" was simply its light from way before With these NFTs, they could be snuffed out _instantly_ - Not even leaving a trace of its existence

Nice analogy.

To me, NFTs seem like an elaborate(or just blatant) scam

Was that from Josh Strife Hayes?

@@YugiMomo Close to impossible, wouldn't be surprised if he ripped it off from somewhere else though.

It will sure fade away. NFTs are a scam and scammers always find a new way to scam each other once the trend is over. This thing’s, or cult if we have to be more accurate with the definition, probably will last not for too long, even because of the environmental issue.

I know this sounds weird suggesting this on youtube of all places, but couldn't artists start filing DMCA claims to the google drive links stolen art NFT's rely on and utterly break them? All of a sudden it would be shown how truely pointless they are and NFT owners would realise that they don't actually own the art of the NFT, they didn't comission it from the artist or anything and just have a glorified image link.

@@Draggobuttboi Hard to fight something unregulated and skirts around the law. That's why scammers and pyramid schemes are ripe and everywhere in these things.

im pretty sure something similar to this NFT thing happened in the past, it was a tulip bulb. this tulip bulb became very very very rare since it was "different" and "unique than other plants/flowers a.k.a making it more expensive, the people that got their hands on it would sell it with a higher price and cuz people want to get their hands on this rare and valuable thing, they buy it and sell it with a MORE higher price, rinse and repeat all of that. at the end nobody really wanted the actual tulip bulb and was buying solely for the money and ownership, but then one day the value for this tulip just goes down the hill so fast that the people that own it at that time can't do anything with it since its not that rare and valuable anymore. it was called "Tulip Mania" there is more than this, so feel free to look more about it in the wikipedia page. Also, big thanks to Venerable Bastard206 for correcting me on the item, i remembered light bulb instead of tulip bulb got them mixed up and somehow ended up with a lamp. TLDR: something similar happened in the past, and faded into thin air. history is pretty much repeating itself right now and so yes, NFT will infact fade into obscurity sooner or later.

@@arinrxn Holy shit, I did not realize something similar to NFTs occurred! Good to know that it has died down along with the fact that NFTs will die off not being valuable anymore

Even worse, someone with access to Stan Lees Twitter account has been using it to push superhero NFTs. The culture around them and the ghouls who love them seriously gross me out.

Just in someone has been making bad pixel art of deceased RU-vidr etika and selling nfts of it to "commemorate him"

@@brianthepyromancer924 fucks sake. The shit people will stoop to in pursuit of money they likely don't even need is disgusting.

Legit it made me almost cry, not just the nft part but the story up to that point as well.

I never even heard about Qinni and such until this video, I don't participate in the art world though I am studying cyber security which crypto currency has to do with. I honestly don't understand crypto currency at all but whatever. I'm upset to hear about Qinni (I don't know if she died so) I hope she gets better somehow and that her art stops bring stolen for this damn garbage.

right? i believe quinni inspired soooo many people in the 2010´s, theres probably no one i know who havent seen her art. i was really upset when she passed away, and seeing what theyre doing now is just utterly disgusting.

@@dazaisart2406 Did she work on a lot of adult swim shows? I remember always seeing the titmouse logo come on during the credits.

@@noelvalenzarro I also work at titmouse, around the time quinni was working there we were doing a bunch of dreamworks shows. Not much Adult swim though. There was a small art exhibit that was put on at our studio after her passing

@@sunstrike2738 Yhen you’re still both probably responsible for some great stuff I’ve enjoyed. Thank you both.

Artists like her are the only real celebrities in my life. I feel a stronger connection to people like her or Loish than anybody the media deems as being "famous". I study their artstyle and use it to develop my own. They've played a big role in my life, just by sharing their art. So, hearing that she went to the same school and worked at the same studio as you, seems a bit surreal for me, i guess famous artists are just normal people.

Scarcity is the number one thing that decides how "valuable" something is. If there's twice as many dollars out there as there were yesterday your dollar is worth half what it was. Silver and gold were used as currency because they were rare and lasted forever. Historic paintings have value, as do paintings made by artists. There is value in scarcity and being the "first" or "only" of something, nobody denies this with original pieces of artifacts, money, or historical paintings but suddenly it doesn't make sense for NFT's?

This seems like the very definition of a fad.

Human greed is so pathetic

@@dirtydan2721 problem is how the fuck can you create scarcity out of something intangible like digital art or an encrypted string of text leading to the image. People can right click save them and there is this guy who literally downloaded all the NFTs at that time and put them online to be downloaded for free. And 'scarcity' is a joke in the NFT space when everyone is flooding out low value crap day by day. Yes, they may be unique, but so is every piece of rock out there. They may be shaped differently and come in various sizes and weight but ultimately have little to no value. Historic paintings are valuable because of their cultural/religious/historic/emotional significance they may carry. NFTs are valuable because of speculation and the amount of money people pump into them.

People who buy NFTs don't even really "own" the image. The image itself is just a very long number that can be copied freely. What they really own is a receipt that _says_ they own the image.

Literally, you could get some of the most gorgeous art of ANYTHING you want, a character, a landscape, a game, a fucking animation, WHATEVER YOU WANT for like $200? Orrr you could get a shitty looking ape for $50,000

@@Hevii_ truth

you're only sseeing when celebities spend cash for highly minted pieces that's inflated with value. most of these start out as cheap as 30$ and eventually inflates based on the same method forex traders uses to get rich from stocks or crypto

Its an issue of liquidity! you can unload as easily as you acquire. this is why people love stocks!

@@Nekusa aka ponzi scheme

Same. If you're building a 'metaverse' why would you make it possible to be poor there

Never has the phrase a "a fool and their money are easily parted" been more applicable.

@@aduantas Yep! The early internet was great because it was necessarily communistic; there was no real money to be made, so people did cool stuff for the joy of doing it. Now that it has been monopolized and commercialized, though, people see it as an extension of their current material conditions. It's turning into just another big market now.

@@drlemon7729 Because that's not how you make money on consumers of your alternate reality

...NFT's don't have the desire to create artificial scarcity, that's what the currency behind it wants, and it's not even artificial. The technology behind crypto ensures a finite amount. Secondly, the internet was never "necessarily communistic". It was always privately own. In order for someone to even access the internet, especially in the early days, be economically well-off to afford a computer. The money made was in the machine you purchased. Lastly, the internet STILL has the means to and continue make things without economic incentives entirely without commercialization. Just because product consumers created their own space doesn't mean that's all there is. By all means, there is nothing stopping anyone from accessing some backwoods anachronistic websites entirely void of economic benefit. PS: The ever increasing corporatization of the internet by publicly owned companies is what makes the internet "necessarily communistic" now more than ever.

What bothers me most about the majority of people commenting here, is they are happy to be completely voluntarily miseducated about Crypto, NFTs and blockchain. Yet they are happy to 'cherry-pick' their opinions, presented as information, and foist it on others as if it's fact.

How many people are buying it is worth for some people

@@PrecociousFriand Hate to break it to you NFT Bro but no, the current state of 99% of NFTs are literally worthless. A Bored Ape, Lazy Lion, etc only has value the second you purchase them and then they drop to valueless until someone decides to spend money on it. A shitty computer generated jpg does not have a copyright to buy and has absolutely no intrinsic value.

@@loyalty5207 nope they ain't my guy. You need to understand something, if people are paying money for it then that shit ain't worthless. It literally has worth because someone paid for it or is willing to pay for it. If a lot of people want something, such as people fighting over a rare shoe, then the worth is higher usually. That's what defines the value of something. If nobody wants it, then it is indeed worthless no matter how much money you put into producing it. The worth something has is the worth the owner or buying-public gives it. YOU yourself don't think it has value. But that's just it, that's what YOU think, that's YOUR opinion. There are other people out there who see these NFTs and say "that has value to me", and thus they have value.

@@Lycaon1765 Yes but eventually that bubble will burst, because people only buy nfts cause they think they will go up in value. As soon as there is any indication that nfts will go down in value everyone will sell and nfts will be worthless.

Man my rage is boiling at this moment , shit does happen when you sell a signal of one’s life and hardship for a quick buck !

Same. Total rage. I'm also an artist who happens to be chronically ill, currently waiting to find out a potentially dangerous diagnosis that would require brain surgery. If my surgery went wrong, or my condition is worse than my doctors think, I *HATE* the idea of some greedy tech bro stealing my work for an easy buck. The thief isn't the one who's worked their entire life to hone their skills, or put hours and hours into every piece that they created with their own hands, which are calloused and scarred from pencils, pens, paintbrushes, power tools, sandpaper, solvents, every sort of sewing needle, stitched up, and burned. Hands that have IV scars in the backs. All for a labour of love, because you *don't* go into this field for the money! I would come back and haunt that guy's ass like the girl from The Ring, You don't rip off an artist who's been working through the pain.

I had been following her for years and had a few interactions with her in her ig comment section. When she posted about her illness it broke my heart. I cried bitterly the day she passed away. To hear how someone took advantage of her memory in such a horrible way makes me furious beyond words.

@@neuralmute While your comment at the end is hilarious, I do hope for things to get easier for you. You're awesome and if you're an artist and are comfortable with sharing your Instagram, would you share it with me? I'd love to support you!

@@dataexpunged6969 Thanks for the support! Working with chronic pain isn't something I'd recommend to anybody, but it's better than doing nothing. I'm hoping that at least one of my problems will see better treatment over the next year, and the hope keeps me going. I apologise, but I don't feel comfortable sharing identifying info on here, especially in the comments of a video about NFTs, where art poachers might be hanging out. Right now especially, while I'm trying to put together a portfolio for an advanced degree, I can't afford to have my work plagerised. I'm sure you can understand that! Take care, and all the best to you.

Don't you know, artists did not exist prior to NFTs?! /s

Yea.., all method u just mention, still will not work for small artists, as an artist, u have to know how important that is to have reputation instead of only skills.

It's so annoying because now non-artists and laypeople who know nothing about it, but probably heard it on some article or video once now think this is a way for artists to make SO MUCH MONEY! Little do they know it has nothing to do with art at all, it's a total scheme.

@@-rcrc-r7624 Still, having great skills are better than reputation since it's much long lasting more. Many NFTs are from those who can't draw a decent thing

@@rockocandyeye I saw someone who had made NFT's for charity to save penguins or something like that. First of all, it looked like the work from a 10 year old and secondly it's a fact that NFT's are *very* bad for the climate. I wish they made better use of the electrical power and the space that data centers take up for this stuff no one cares about.

That's my point. I've seen a lot of people prasing NFTs for being a way to "support digital artists" -- and it's clear to me that those people had never thought about artist support until they needed an excuse to justify pouring millions of dollars into glorified files. If you really care about owning a unique piece of work from an artist, what's better than a commission? You have complete control over its inception, and it is far more personalized than any randomized layered image will ever be. Oh right, I forgot. Commissions are actually generally affordable and you can't brag about being "rich" because you own one. Silly me.

@@Vale-jb9dr Like NFT bros also point out that with commissions "doesn't mean I own the piece. I pay to own all rights to it to do whatever I want" to which I will go "Well pay me an extra $200 and we are gucchi. Do whatever with your commission, hell, even say you didn't even know the artist cuz you know in the end it will all come back to me with you being a total asshat and ignoring my name." But even THEN that's not good enough because the whole NFT thing they need an official receipt of them being able to do whatever the hell they want with it with full ownership. To which I can only respond with "Grow the fuck up you man-child"

"Please commission me i'm Literally Dying Of starvation"

@@johnsalchichon777 "Haha, Kemono Party goes brrrrrr"

@@Vale-jb9dr Exactly. The only way to support digital artists is to.. actually support them. Using character generator and selling them for millions isn't support. It's a blatant fucking insult. It really fucking hurts. I did digital commissions for friends. Hell, I don't care how they use the art, as long as they keep my artist signature on the drawing and don't claim it as theirs I don't care how they use it. They paid for it. NFTs could have been good (hear me out... I swear I'm not crazy) if they just weren't a lazy scam. It's highly insulting to artists. Hell, there are probably artists out there who have something similar to NFTs that were creative and fair but are now overshadowed by other NFTs and the stigma of those NFTs. It's especially disgusting how a lot of the art is fucking stolen from alive and DEAD people, as well as sold based on dead people (for example, Stan Lee and Bob Ross.... disrespectful), as well as just... made from character generators??? One-Of-A-Kind things are super fun. I'm one of those people who love to collect things. But it shouldn't've come to this. Maybe in an alternate universe, NFTs are just digitalized one-of-a-kinds with real effort. I just could not agree with you more. NFTs are an insult to traditional and digital art.... as well as the environment. How sad.

that is a bunch of nonsense. What will you do, force me to delete it?

@@abdallababikir9154 wtf? did you miss the entire point of my comment? I was saying if I truly owned something nonfungible, then I get to do whatever I want with it, even if that means permanent destruction, but because an NFT can be replicated and the only part of it I own is a reciept, then I do not have this power and thus ownership is less valuable.

@@BlazingKhioneus ohh my bad, i did miss your point, entirely.

This is one of the gayest things ive read but you raise a good point

It gives me so much emotional value to see other people throw their money away like that.

Worse, they can pull the rug on you and simply take your NFT away. This actually happens.

Anyone with a basic knowledge about NFTs knows this, I don't understand why so many people keep repeating as if it's something "hidden" or unknown Most NFTs store media files in IPFS and only store the metadata on the blockchain, including the hyperlink or IPFS hash code for the files

@@jhonataaraujo6228 In the first place computers can't simply make a random number, much less random web server. We can guess what "random number" a computer will spout out. No reason to not be able to hack into "random" web servers.

@@jhonataaraujo6228 And yet the video this comment is posted on used vocabulary that illustrated their ignorance of this fact, so it bears repeating here. Whether they knew this fact or not, they stated "associated with digital files" ANYBODY saying that an NFT is owning of a "file" of any kind is likely forgetting the fact I stated, or is obstinately omitting the quite important asterisk that people seem to forget. NFT's usually point to a hyperlink, the ones that do you do not actually own the image in any way shape or form. You own the hyperlink to that image and nothing more. The ones that are NOT hyperlinks are a bit different, checksum NFTs you don't actually own the image/file either, you own the verification OF that file. All it takes is for that file to undergo any kind of back end modification for it to be considered not yours, for the sake of art, that means that as long as I make the file slightly different enough for the numbers to match up, you hold no ownership of it. So when I right click and save as a different extension, you don't even have a way to identify that image that was stolen, as your checksum would be different or easily altered from the original without it visually changing a single pixel. The ONLY NFTs that seem to be actual ownership of an image are the files small enough to fit into the code of the NFT, so pixel art at best. But this is an outlier, pretty uncommon for NFTs to be used in this way, and while they exist, he showed an image that would be too large to encode directly into the block chain while saying this (and the content of the rest of the video) for this to be understood.

@@the11382 i forgot who did it, but im pretty sure its the EvolvedApes case right?

ooh didnt even think of the twitter pfp incentive nice catch!

It's a pyramid scheme. Eventually the greatest idiot has a monkey picture that nobody wants to buy and he's down 5 million shitcoin.

@@yummyherbicide7296 shitcoin lmao

I dont have one, i dont need one, i dont want one

MLM

@@sskogsraa as a fellow artist, my idea is to get ahead and steal nft's and repost them in zip folders for everyone to download "make your own nft's" LMAO are you hearing yourself

Ok bud

@@sskogsraa I shouldn’t have to do something I don’t wanna do because other people are assh*les

It makes me want to mash my brain like potatoes

Can't wait for the day when the market drops and all these NFT supporters can't sell their assets lmao, that would be hilarious 😂 I might be psychopath for wishing ppl to lose money, but idc

Financial bubbles are a hallmark of capitalism and I can only hope people become annoyed wtih them in time to enjoy a more controlled human society for at least a while before this planet becomes significantl less liveable.

@@hauntr416 it’s fine, in this case it can be excused

@sotuur aeei They're even worse than toxic fanbases

I feel like Nft was created for abuse

Well that wouldn't be a very useful synonym, in the vast majority of contexts swapping out "scam" with "NFT" would change the meaning of the sentence way too much to be useful for writers.

Did you even watch the video?

funny

This. I'm a photographer but I'd have way more luck selling prints as a small photographer than selling NFTs. The people who are already big are the ones that can sell their NFTs

Yeahh this pretty much. I got into it briefly when my other online artist friends told me about it, and then watched as my actual art pieces that I was really proud of just sat there while everyone just started buying bored apes. It was never about the art, and it's really disappointing.

I never understood the beanie baby thing. Like, what gave people the idea that they'd be worth money in the first place? With NFTs connection to cryptocurrencies, it's not crazy that people would expect them to be worth money (dumb but not surprising), but cloth animals filled with pellets???

Yup. This. If _everyone_ knows how "valuable" they are at retail and buys a shit ton of them, the scarcity in which their high value comes from is stripped away.

@@auqustfire Collectibles are a weird market where you're basically gambling on the future having nostalgia for the past and being willing to pay high prices for them. With beanies, it was the *LIMITED RUN!!* thing that made people lose their heads. But something being limited edition only increases in value if there's a want for that thing after the production run is over. (Plus "Limited" when it comes to mass produced products is another thing entirely...)

@@FranNyan The same thing happens with Funko Pops (of which, the company Funko has started making NFTs themselves as shown with the Bob Ross thing). Certain pops get a limited amount or limited time to be sold, so a lot of people in the community lose their minds trying to wait in line for the newest releases for one of two reasons; 1) That they really want this pop for their personal collection for multitudes of different reasons (such as completing a set, favorite character, nostalgia reason, etc.) or 2) They think it'll be worth something and buy it at retail to sell it much higher right after, or after waiting for awhile. The difference with those is that pops have kept this up for over 10 years now, but like anything eventually popularity will wear off and prices for highly sought after pops will also drop no matter how "limited" any of them are.

At least you can hold Beanie Babies in your hands. Not that they're worth 30k or whatever..but at least its a psychical thing that you can't have taken away from you by it being deleted.

kandyland

Well fuck

Hey! Robots can have expressions too you know! Just not this one...

Very well said! I'm an artist too and those drawings say nothing by themselves. It is all about the value attributed to them not by the art, but by its potential for profit on resale.

“Algorithmically generated noise.” This is why I came here.

I am also an artist, and you just said perfectly what I was feeling viscerally this entire time.

The contemp art movement have been playing with these notions you talk about for a long time. Nfts are just pushing it to a pinnacle, It’s interesting to watch people play around the irony of what art is and it’s monetary value. I make art for a living it’s my day job and I’m lucky enough to have that, nfts do not affect my livelihood at all and I can’t see it having any real repercussions to any working artist why are people so obsessed with hating them? Every new technology has its growing pains let the space blossom into what it can be instead of shitting on everything new.

Literal bot made shit looks better than the stuff people make on there-

Except not really. NFTs were never meant for artists. This is just the narrative the media and the people invested in crypto tell you to get involved. When you buy an NFT, you don't buy art. You buy a piece of random code verified by an online ledger as unique. The artwork is but a smokescreen. At its core, it's a purpose-made speculative market designed so that there's something people can buy with their cryptocurrency, which can then be sold to speculators hoping to make it big by selling it to a bigger fool later down the line. It is, by the strictest definition, a scam, or rather the new way to pull people into the crypto-currency pyramid scheme.

RIGHT?!

I feel like this is a really two dimensional answer, as there are a lot of roadblocks and limitations that aren't immediately apparent when you say "just commision lol"

If these guys spent a portion of the money they would spend on commissions rather than these the commission market would be so much better.

Commissions sound like a good use for crypto, imagine having the guarantee that both artist and commissioner stay anonymous. Shame most crypto goes into people speculating

Legitimately I've commissioned artists around 10 times now, just coming across their open comms announcement on my dash on Tumblr, and every time I've done it I've been super pleased with it. It's nice being able to directly support artists I follow and maybe get a picture of a minor video game character that only I like dressed as a pirate.

Well, _that's_ not necessarily the fault of NFTs. It's a symptom of late-stage capitalism in general. People aren't valuing work, they're valuing profit. If you work your back off as a street cleaner and earn a barely-livable wage, you'll get laughed at instead of thanked, because you didn't "choose" to be a millionaire who sits around all day. It used to be "work smart, not hard," but nowadays it's more like "don't work at all."

@@L3X1N no. That's just scammers being scammers, that's how they behave. You get scammers anywhere there is trading.

@@MadsterV In capitalism, scamming is highly incentivised, if not necessary

Yeah exactly! It’s like the exact same thing as an artist on deviant art or something, making a profit from tracing art, except NFT “artists” instead add a layer of egotistical bull crap :/

@@BooksAndShitButNotLiterally nope. That's yet another lie made up by socialists and communists. Why do you think there are laws against false advertising, enforced by the FTC and labeled "anti-competitive"? Capitalism is all for competition in the market. Scamming hurts the market.

Not even a product in this case because they don´t want or need the art, in this case the art is just an excuse, a face for a glorified stock market with no real value

To me the worst thing in that regard is that it wears the skin of being for artists, but since it's biggest proponents are openly using art as an afterthought, tying the essence of art to this thing just drags art down with it. It creates a subconcious feeling that art in general is so insincere. That stain on the reputation affects everyone it's pitched to. For example, if people associate it with new artists or artists otherwise trying to go big, that reflects badly even on the ones not using NFTs. Something that is IMO an essential part of being human is weighed down with so many negative associations at a systematic level, just to make a quick buck.

It isn't illegal. They're selling the token, not the artwork. Of course that doesn't make it morally okay. The only thing where I'd see a chance would be that they're breaking the copyright by posting the images. But even that legal hurdle could be circumvented by embedding the stuff which she posted.

@@ThePandafriend They never argued that it was illegal?

@@aerosma5021 I never claimed that he did. I'm just saying this because it means that they can't do much, unless they try to sell the rights to the image as well.

like, literally comissions are better in almost every way. Doesn't require a stupid currency built on ever increasing power usage, makes art theft harder, the buyer can actually own the product, etc. It's just such a profoundly, obviously stupid idea and I have seen not a single benefit to any of it. The comparison to this "high brow physical work of art" is really telling. It's like fine art trade (which already sucks), but worse.

With things like this, they fall as soon as they rise. I hope to god NFT's become forgotten at some point and become an obscute footnote in art history "Hey bro, remember NFT's?" "tf are NFTs?"

Same, I don’t want this to take off at all

Nft is not an imige file, it would be too much prossesing to turn a whole image to NFT. it is just a link to an image file. And if the server is put of service you have a glorious 404 error page for millions

If you think that then you never had your art stolen. Or never made any real good art that is worth stealing.

And it takes far, far, less energy.

Think of something really fucking stupid you've bought before. Something others might judge you for getting in the first place, but you still enjoy anyway. Maybe you bought something to go along with a trend or to be part of some community. Maybe that trend/community was/is mocked a lot online for being seen as supposedly worthless or dumb. But you still enjoy your purchase anyway. Now realize that people buy NFTs because they want it. You yourself may not see value in it but that doesn't mean that other people have to agree with you nor defend their like of it (as long as it's not something morally repulsive or actively harmful, obvi). It's like saying "let's play channels shouldn't exist! Why would you ever want to watch someone play a game when you can play the game yourself?!?" They exist because people like it.

@@Lycaon1765 Let's Plays are more entertaining than playing games myself (which I don't do because video games are stupid) Getting custom art is purely better than buying some random garbage for loads more money in the hope you can make a profit

@@pureevil9496 Again, that's your opinion man. Very clearly these NFT folks disagree.

Not to mention that if you buy art or a collectible because you genuinely like it, then its monetary worth doesn't matter. But collecting ugly NFTs you don't actually enjoy in the hopes of them making you money someday is even more risky than buying NFTs you actually enjoy, because if you like them and they're worthless...well, at least you like them. But if you don't even like them and they're worthless, then you're SOL even on a sentimental level. You're no different than people who don't like plushies/toys but thought buying Beanie Babies would pay for their kids' college, or elderly people shocked that their Precious Moments figurine collections kept untouched in dusty boxes in the attic for decades they only bought for the sole purpose of funding their retirement are now completely worthless.