|
|
|
|
|
|
by rikroots
1726 days ago
|
|
|
I did laugh when I read the linked article - the idea that they are destroying the real world to create a limited edition of computer generated worlds that, to me, don't look that sophisticated anyway. I have an interest in both generative art and in world-building. I know that artists often struggle financially while working on their creations so any source of revenue is welcome ... but I can't justify to myself the damage I would cause if I attempted to profit from my work by minting Ethereum-backed NFTs linked to them. I understand there's an argument saying that the NFTs aren't doing the damage themselves, that the damage is mainly due to Ethereum speculation ([1], and also [2]). Even so, I worry. Also, whenever I think about NFTs, I see Dutch tulip bulbs[3]. I expect I'm being too pessimistic and that NFTs will endure beyond the end of the decade. [1] - https://www.artnews.com/art-news/news/nft-carbon-environment... [2] - https://www.wired.com/story/nfts-hot-effect-earth-climate/ [3] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania |
|
|