Brian Eno Slams NFTs: “Now Artists Can Become Little Capitalist Assholes As Well”

[zero]

16 minutes ago, dr lopez said:

this is the same reason people are buying NFTs. to support the artist who made it rather than just "steal" it.

depends. I am not into this whole crypto/NFT world and am no expert, but have a good friend that is heavily into it. I asked his thoughts on NFTs, and he mentioned that people he knows buy them as some sort of "badge of honor" in the crypto world. that if you have super expensive NFTs in your portfolio, this somehow indicates you are a player, and are accepted into other crypto circles because you have them. just pointing this out as an example that not everyone buys them with good intentions of supporting the artist.

[Plarkreluke Banloboh]

2 minutes ago, luke viia said:

(I still think that creating scarcity where it doesn't truly exist is shitty).

Given that digital technology has made infinite duplication so simple, isn’t it advantageous to also have the option of scarcity? Being able to copy files and media is usually a good thing but not in every situation. It’s true that it is imposed scarcity, but that could be considered a creative choice.

[Audioblysk]

NFT’s are what gives me hope thaT my brain stroked out during a whopper acid/mdma combo on New Year’s Eve 2014.

 

every time I smell burnt toast I just know that someone has minted a slack-jawed monkey wearing the zippered clothing from MJ’s ‘Bad’ music video and it sold for 134k in online pedo dubloons

 

is this heaven or did I fuck up somewhere?

[luke viia]

11 minutes ago, webby said:

Given that digital technology has made infinite duplication so simple, isn’t it advantageous to also have the option of scarcity? Being able to copy files and media is usually a good thing but not in every situation. It’s true that it is imposed scarcity, but that could be considered a creative choice.

I have opinions on this that are unlikely to be shared by many others (particularly on a forum full of people who spend their time making digitized art of one variety or another), so I'll just say: no, I do not think scarcity is good, period. But our social / economic system, current ideas about what constitutes or should constitute a "living," issues of perceived value, of what may or should be freely shared, of intellectual property, yadda yadda yadda... it all comes into this. 

And I will refuse to further elaborate bc I'll never be able to make a nuanced enough argument for my views ITT

Edited December 22, 2021 by luke viia

[TubularCorporation]

At least a really high end, well engineered turntable takes a lot of extremely precise machining that takes a lot of hands on work even if it's done with CNC, and a lot of expertise and experience in the design phase, and there's no longer an economy of scale to offset that.  So whether or not it's "worth it" there's actually a reason for the cost (when they aren't just middling quality, conspicuous consumption status items or junk for people with ore money than sense like the $3000 ultrasonic record cleaners that are just a common $150 ultrasonic cleaning tank with a fancy looking label, or anything marketed with the word "audiophile").

 

Not saying Eno's necessarily qualifies, I'm talking about something like this where a skilled engineer designed everything from scratch, hand machined the metal parts, han built the electronics, etc. - whether or not you think any of that matters, there's a concrete reason why if you wanted one for yourself it would be expensive.

 

NFTs, on the other hand, are people paying to get a recipt for a URL they have no control of that points to a file they have no control of, hoping that they'll be able to pass the bag to someone else and make a profit.

 

EDIT: a statistically significant percentage of them are proably buying the NFTs from themselves to inflate the market price, too.

Edited December 22, 2021 by TubularCorporation

[brian trageskin]

20 minutes ago, TubularCorporation said:

I'm talking about something like this 

that's just a rice cooker/pressure cooker combo though.

[usagi]

1 hour ago, Audioblysk said:

online pedo dubloons

lol

[dcom]

4 hours ago, dr lopez said:

we all pay for bandcamp downloads when we could just as easily pirate the music and not pay for it, but we choose to pay because we understand it's supporting artists. this is the same reason people are buying NFTs. to support the artist who made it rather than just "steal" it.

I promised myself that I wouldn't get caught up in any of the hot-button conversations in here anymore, but I can't not comment on this: one is an artificially scarce piece of data, a digital certificate of ownership of sorts - not even the original artwork - with extremely speculative valuation which no-one pays for with actual money, but with other pieces of data with similar speculative value; the other is a way to almost directly support labels and artists whose music is being appreciated, with actual money, with no artificial scarcity, with infinite reproducibility and oftentimes with actual artistic value and creativity behind them. Most NFTs are a travesty of art and creativity, some 8-bit pseudo-Warholian (which he would probably appreciate as a piss-take) series of semi-organized pixels that pale in comparison to C=64 game sprites. NFTs are all about the grift, the scam, the bait-and-switch, Bandcamp delivers the goods any time, every time. It's a categorical error to even compare NFTs to what Bandcamp does - I wouldn't want to pirate NFTs (thel pieces of "art" the block in the chain say the owner has, not the block itself, natch) because I can produce more interesting things by squeezing digested organic matter through my anal sphincter. Comparing Bandcamp to NFTs is so absurd it's not even wrong.

Edited December 22, 2021 by dcom

[psn]

Thanks, mate. 

[chenGOD]

7 hours ago, dr lopez said:

you can sell digital art (not music) on bandcamp? Like a 3D digital object or an animation?

Don’t be obtuse man, it’s not cool. 

 

6 hours ago, dr lopez said:

yeah the right click save as argument doesnt really work either... we all pay for bandcamp downloads when we could just as easily pirate the music and not pay for it, but we choose to pay because we understand it's supporting artists. this is the same reason people are buying NFTs. to support the artist who made it rather than just "steal" it.

But in a lot of cases, the purchaser is not buying anything. Not a jpg, png, or bmp, they’re buying a token that says they have ownership of some url that points to a piece of art, and that can easily be taken down. That’s the scam part. 
 

NFTs don’t democratize anything (every artist can easily set up an eth wallet and sell from their website), rather they take away trust from the evolving digital world and place control of “art” back into the hands of the elite who can afford to bid up these pieces. 
 

The “right click save as..” argument is in reference to the obvious difference between a physical object and digital object. Sure object fetishization is gross (my Analord binder will never be sold) but there’s a distinct difference between the turntable and the digital art. 

[dcom]

 

[Enthusiast]

lol

Edited December 23, 2021 by Enthusiast

[TubularCorporation]

6 hours ago, chenGOD said:

But in a lot of cases, the purchaser is not buying anything. Not a jpg, png, or bmp, they’re buying a token that says they have ownership of some url that points to a piece of art, and that can easily be taken down.

100% serious question: isn't this ALWAYS what NFTs are?  I'm not aware of any cases where people AREN'T buying ownership of a URL (except I think "ownership" might actually be an exaggeration, isn't it more like a limited license?).

 

From what I understand about blockchain technology, I think if the energy issue could be solved it might actually be a potential solution to Jaron Lanier's call for a micropayment system that actually compensates the users of "free" services like social media for the value they are creating, but this ain't it (and by "this" I mean every single application of blockchain technology I've ever heard of since I first learned about Bitcoin back in 2009 and thought about getting some before I found out 1 BTC was a little over $100 and that was way too much).

Edited December 23, 2021 by TubularCorporation

[TubularCorporation]

 

The first few minutes of this are the best explanation of the NFT industry i've seen: 

 

[Audioblysk]

I smell toast…

who knows, my idiot coworkers post I screen capped here could be interpreted out of context as the ramblings of a deranged hobo -or- is it the bold vision of the future we’re just too old to see?

[ignatius]

1 hour ago, TubularCorporation said:

 

The first few minutes of this are the best explanation of the NFT industry i've seen: 

 

that's crazy. it's like a loophole made out of loopholes for everything. 

[thumbass]

NFTs are the worst and most bullshit fucking things to come out of 2021. No one can justify it properly in my eyes because at the end of the day you are paying a million bucks for a shitty jpeg of a monkey smoking a cigarette.

End of story

[chenGOD]

3 hours ago, TubularCorporation said:

isn't this ALWAYS what NFTs are? 

I didn't want to use the word always, cause I'm sure there's some where it's not (actually, I think that Sakamoto one where you buy the right to own the signed printed sheet music is kind of different...cause you may actually get a physical product out of it. still just hype BS though).

[usagi]

3 hours ago, TubularCorporation said:

 

The first few minutes of this are the best explanation of the NFT industry i've seen: 

 

Australian Andy Stott explains NFTs.

Edited December 23, 2021 by usagi

[auxien]

8 hours ago, TubularCorporation said:

100% serious question: isn't this ALWAYS what NFTs are?

in the video you linked after that, the guy who's set up the mass file explains at about 6:30 that there are actually a few very small pixel art pieces that are fully stored via blockchain info. and he also states about 16:30 the bored ape ones do actually transfer rights to that image to the owner of the NFT, which i was not aware of. 

i believe some of the NFTs being sold elsewhere do have some slight amount of legitimacy as to the transference of rights of digital files/etc. but those are not very common from what i've seen. 

5 hours ago, chenGOD said:

I think that Sakamoto one where you buy the right to own the signed printed sheet music is kind of different...cause you may actually get a physical product out of it. still just hype BS though

ha, i thought maybe so at first, but not exactly, the first rounds of NFTs for it are just standard bullshit links to an image.

Quote

The 595 music notes contained in the 96 bars of the right-hand melody of Ryuichi Sakamoto’s signature composition, “Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence” were digitally split into single notes and converted into unique NFTs. Each item is linked with an image of the music sheet for the bar containing the corresponding note. Additionally, there will be an auction for “NFT for the rights to obtain “Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence” by Ryuichi Sakamoto handwritten music sheet'' “, after the sale opens. 

...

Additionally, a limited link to download the WAV file of "Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence" full version will be sent as a benefit gift for first-time buyers. Owners of the NFT will be given the right to join the auction for “NFT for the rights to obtain “Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence” by Ryuichi Sakamoto handwritten music sheet”.

...

For the successful bidder of “NFT for the rights to obtain “Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence” by Ryuichi Sakamoto handwritten music sheet”, the physical copy will be sent after the notice by "Adam byGMO". As there is only a single copy of the handwritten music sheet, only the successful bidder of the first sale will exercise this item's right.

the ultimate prize for all this NFT bullshit for Sakamoto's piece is...buying (rather, bidding on in an auction!) a handwritten music sheet. it's just eBay but with some extra bullshit on the front end to make it feel kewl.

 

Edited December 23, 2021 by auxien

[Rubin Farr]

5 hours ago, thumbass said:

NFTs are the worst and most bullshit fucking things to come out of 2021. No one can justify it properly in my eyes because at the end of the day you are paying a million bucks for a shitty jpeg of a monkey smoking a cigarette.

End of story

If I ever wasted a dollar on this craze, it would have to be porn, lol

[beerwolf]

An angry Eno isn’t exactly something to worry about is it?

An angry Sean Booth is definitely one to keep a beady eye on. I’d think twice about toe to toe with him. But Brian? Nah he’s a bit like Bagpuss.

 

[chenGOD]

22 minutes ago, auxien said:

 

ha, i thought maybe so at first, but not exactly, the first rounds of NFTs for it are just standard bullshit links to an image.

the ultimate prize for all this NFT bullshit for Sakamoto's piece is...buying a handwritten music sheet. it's just eBay but with some extra bullshit on the front end to make it feel kewl.

 

Lol yeah I didn’t read closely enough.

Quote

Owners of the NFT will be given the right to join the auction for “NFT for the rights to obtain “Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence” by Ryuichi Sakamoto handwritten music sheet”.

You get to bid on an NFT, to then join an auction for another NFT.  
It’s NFTs all the way down! Lol

[TubularCorporation]

6 hours ago, thumbass said:

NFTs are the worst and most bullshit fucking things to come out of 2021. No one can justify it properly in my eyes because at the end of the day you are paying a million bucks for a shitty jpeg of a monkey smoking a cigarette.

No, you are paying a million dollars to have a permanent record on the blockchain that shows you could have spent a million dollars on a shitty jpeg of a monkey if that were an option, which it wasn't*.

 

Anyway, I learned long ago to never underestimate the ability of people to throw away their money for the sake of being in on the joke, ever since I guy I knew auctioned off his contempt for humanity on eBay back around 1999 and it got bid up to over $40,000 in a couple days days before eBay pulled it for violating their terms of service (because it wasn't tangible).

 

*That Lazy Apes shit apparently DOES transfer copyright of the image to the person who buys the NFT though, so it's slightly less meaningless than most of them I guess.

Edited December 23, 2021 by TubularCorporation

[TubularCorporation]

6 hours ago, chenGOD said:

I didn't want to use the word always, cause I'm sure there's some where it's not (actually, I think that Sakamoto one where you buy the right to own the signed printed sheet music is kind of different...cause you may actually get a physical product out of it. still just hype BS though).

Yeah, fair enough.  I think between the "buying a treasure map" analogy in that video I posted and "buying a recipt," pretty much everything I've ever heard about them being used for is covered.