profile

Luke Willis

You probably shouldn't buy that...

published9 months ago
1 min read

I finally got around to reading Seth Godin's thoughts on NFTs. Here's my take on the traps laid out in the post.

[creators will] become promoters of digital tokens more than they are creators.

This will definitely be the case for some creators, but I don't think this is a new problem (every creator needs to put cheerios in their bowl--some focus more on the creating, others on the cheerios). NFTs are just a new venue (with plenty of money/demand) where you can promote your creation.

And unlike actual works of art, NFTs aren’t usually aesthetically beautiful on their own, they simply represent something that is.

NFTs aren't art. They're a token that represents ownership of art (or anything else). "ownership of the Mona Lisa" isn't beautiful either.

BUYERS of NFTs may be blind to the fact that there’s no limit on the supply...It’s an unregulated, non-transparent hustle with ‘bubble’ written all over it.

This is probably true to an extent. Buyers are chasing hype and expecting return on investment. Owning art (even if it's really good) doesn't guarantee returns. I believe some NFTs will retain or increase in value, but there will be losers. Time will tell.

THE REST OF US are going to pay for NFTs for a very long time. They use an astonishing amount of electricity to create and trade.

This issue is specific to proof of work (Seth addresses this in a later post on why blockchain matters). Koinos Proof of Burn doesn't suffer from this energy inefficiency.

To summarize, I think Seth's issues are mostly with speculation--which I agree with. If you're excited about the potential use-cases for blockchain, NFTs are a foundational element. That doesn't inherently make them good investments.

More tomorrow,

-Luke

P.S. If you can't afford to lose money (whether it's cryptocurrency or paper), don't speculate with it.

P.P.S. Thanks, Jonathan! :)