I know the purpose of NFT's. And in the classical art world, with priceless paintings, they can be a great way to establish ownership. But for pictures of squirrels? Apes? ###? If you have a NFT of a .jpg picture, let's say, and it's a famous picture, then there may be millions of copies on the internet. Anyone can have one. What would make having the NFT for that picture have any added value to anyone? Everyone can already save a copy of the same picture. There is no trademark or usage rights established by NFT's. It just means you "own" it, the "original". But there's still 23 million copies all over the internet, and everyone can right-click and save as. And then someone has the SAME picture saved that someone else paid $1 million for the NFT or whatever.
Just never sold on the fad....
If it's a tangible item you can possess, then a NFT can have some value. But for digital pictures, what does it add?
A lot of popular nfts were manipulated to an extreme via wash trading, many wash-traded their nfts over 800 times, baking fake volume in to influence naive investors that they were legit purchases. Mostly pump and dump.
The best NFTs to invest in will be unique identity and domains via platforms like ENS, real estate, hotel rooms, and parametric insurance.
My thoughts about NFTs and Crypto… if you’re dumb enough to spend money on a jpeg of a monkey or something called diarrheacoin, you deserve to lose every cent of it. It’s like credit default swapping but for incels.
For Unicoin. And it had a unicorn as a logo. And a bunch of mug shots of supposedly notable people from something called Unicorn Hunters who were apparently launching it and how you should get on board.
If "notable" people can just fabricate "currency" out of thing air and people are dumb enough to invest in it/get taken by these notable people, they deserve everything that comes to them.