Comment on [deleted]
ByGourou@sh.itjust.works 1 year agoI hate to say this but cricket is right. The item being physical or not do not matter for this kind of show off purshase. A Rolex or Birkin has pratically no construction cost, same as an nft (relative to their selling price).
And I don’t understand the point about the environnement, are you saying nft are negative because of their environnemental impact while a Rolex is positive ?
If so you I’m sure you can find plenty of status symbol item that pollute more than nft…
Nft are still stupid and people at this party are probably insufferable tho.
homicidalrobot@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Uninformed take. The lowball for construction cost on a 2,000 euro rolex is ~700 euro. You also don’t understand the power draw of blockchain verification. You are 100% talking out of your ass.
cricket98@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Sounds like you don’t understand. The blockchain that these monkey pictures are on do not use proof of work mining anymore, so there is no “wasting energy” anymore in the form of GPU/ASIC mining.
homicidalrobot@lemm.ee 1 year ago
So their contract addresses are down and they don’t do the one thing that set them apart from a usual token? Crazy. Sounds like it’s STILL worthless lmfao
cricket98@lemmy.world 1 year ago
What are you talking about? Did you respond to the wrong comment?
ByGourou@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
A supercar cost a lot to construct but I’m pretty sure it’s worse for the environnement than a single nft (and don’t tell me it’s useful, in most case it will stay rotting in a garage)… A Birkin bag can cost 100.000+ which is league out of it’s construction cost… Heck, a signed baseball cost 5 bucks to make and can sell for 600.000. . Not everything has more fake value and effect on the environnement, but you can find worse thing for each aspects. Not saying nft are good, nft are trash, but it’s not a special kind of trash.
homicidalrobot@lemm.ee 1 year ago
It’s a gold brick scam, it’s a special enough type of trash to have a name dude