[0xdeadb00f]

I've only ever seen artists make and sell their art as NFTs. Which is why I asked. Because I'm confused as to why an artist would do that.

I understand it's a massive scam but I didn't get why prominent artists I follow are getting into it in the first place.

[thrashh]

The original artist doesn’t get any money if a physical version gets resold either.

NFTs could theoretically actually allow artists to get a cut of any future sales because of its basis in smart contracts.

Of course, NFTs can be used for money laundering as well but art is presumably already used for that purpose.

[nuerow]

> Of course, NFTs can be used for money laundering as well but art is presumably already used for that purpose.

Modern art is primarily driven for the purpose of money laundering.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/29/business/art-money-launde...

NFTs are just a new way to conduct the same money laundering schemes which, loopholes and the lack of regulation, are easier to hide and exploit.

This recent change adopted by the IRS is just a way to address that loophole, and lo and behold it's spun as a deadly attack on the purposefulness of the entire technology.

[rchaud]

> I didn't get why prominent artists I follow are getting into it in the first place.

Power law. Prominent artists will move to cash in now, as they can hoover up 90% of whatever legitimate business there is. The remaining 10% will be fought over by no-name artists who enter the scene too late.

[nuerow]

> I understand it's a massive scam but I didn't get why prominent artists I follow are getting into it in the first place.

Even highly respected artists are not immune to the appeal of making an easy buck. For instance, as legend would have it, Pablo Picasso created his "Poor Robbie" engraving with the express purpose of monetizing it, so that his close friend Robert Godet could quite literally use his printing press to whip out yet another "limited edition" print whenever he was short on cash and needed a quick buck.