[cr1895]

>You could have a tangible copy of the Mona Lisa that is physically indistinguishable from the real one.

It certainly would not be. It might look very very similar, but in no way indistinguishable to the degree that one digital file is literally the same as a copy of itself.

[SuoDuanDao]

>one digital file is literally the same as a copy of itself.

That's the problem NFT's seek to solve ;). You may not think it's a problem, but a lot of people on the production side of digital artwork do.

[dcolkitt]

Top forgeries are so similar that it often takes a team of experts independently examining a piece until the fake is detected.

Are you seriously trying to claim that the reason the original Mona Lisa has value (vis-a-vis a high quality forgery) is because of the minute tangible composition of the paint?

I’m sorry, but no. It’s clearly the intangible provenance. Otherwise forgeries wouldn’t fall in value when detected, because after all nothing has changed about their tangible composition.

[cr1895]

>Top forgeries are so similar that it often takes a team of experts independently examining a piece until the fake is detected.

And even if it might be difficult to tell apart, it isn't literally the same thing.

>Are you seriously trying to claim that the reason the original Mona Lisa has value (vis-a-vis a high quality forgery) is because of the minute tangible composition of the paint?

I'm not sure how you concluded that is what I said. I never made any statement as to why it is valued the way that it is.