• dohpaz42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Yeah, but do paintings typically lose almost all of their value? I thought the idea was that the value should either stay the same or go up.

    Either way, in this case, it couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy.

    • BigFig@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      18 hours ago

      The point here is say you are in business with X party but it’s illegal. X party can buy an nft worth nothing or generate one. You buy the NFT for the amount of your bill with X party. You’ve now technically not paid them for whatever illegal thing, instead you bought an nft from them. You could also break this down into multiple NFTs, buying 100 $100 NFTs from various “owners” that don’t link back to X party through shell companies, and you’ve now paid them $10,000 “for pictures of chimps”.

      NFTs only exist for money laundering and illicit transfers. Once they’ve been transferred their value no longer matters, the business has been done.

      • anonklay@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Thank you! Now for the first time, i finally see the slightest sense in NFTs. I really didn’t get it from the start. I heard various explanations and they never made any sense to me. Left me confused every time until now.

        Its just a mask for a deal in the background. Ok now i get it.

      • Ms. ArmoredThirteen@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        14 hours ago

        NFTs only exist for money laundering and illicit transfers

        And at least to some degree scamming people even if that’s not the main focus. I know a few people that got full on scammed by it

    • Khanzarate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      18 hours ago

      For Logan Paul, yes, he wanted it to go up.

      But if this painting was laundering at work, the important part is that the seller can point to this transaction as “real”. The IRS or the FBI might be looking into his sudden gains of half a million dollars, but when they do, they find that he sold Logan Paul half a million dollars of art.

      The NFT part makes it incredibly easy to generate said art. Before NFTs, rich people would mark up paintings, and those had to go up in value, because they would buy them at 100,000$ and sell them for 200,000$, so the government would see 100,000$ of profit, but the next guy with the painting, he’d have to sell it for 300,000, claiming 100,000$ in profit, and the next guy, 400,000$, you get the idea.

      NFTs can lose value in a way real art isnt allowed to because anyone can claim that’s the price, and after the sale, they can be discarded as trash, essentially. New ones can be made in bulk for no effort, and its alright to sell 1000 NFTs at 100$ each, because you can just keep making them and “selling” them and no one has to care about their value in the same way because they’re mass producible without that crashing the market.

        • Khanzarate@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          13 hours ago

          You can also just never sell it, but buying it doesn’t help you launder your own ill-gotten money, just other people’s. The issue is creating it. It’s not that big an issue, but NFTs are way more efficient.