back to article Bill Gates says NFTs '100% based on greater fool theory' amid crypto cataclysm

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates has declared that "expensive digital images of monkeys are going to improve the world immensely." He was joking, obviously, though considering Gates's supposed connection to microchips in vaccines, one can never be too careful. What he's talking about are non-fungible tokens (NFTs), which came …

  1. WolfFan

    He’s right.

    And the blockchain brigade will be very upset with him.

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: He’s right.

      The way things are going for them he's probably the least of their worries.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      He's partly right

      People have described the scam and bubble side both of over and over of late.

      It's natural, the bubble burst again, the scammers ran for the exits.

      and much like the latest return of JFK to Dallas, there is a room full of confused marks standing around wondering why their wallets are empty and their heads are on fire.

      But just because people were dumping piles of real and virtual money on digital tulips or beanie babies doesn't mean there is nothing to the ideas. Yeah, crappy low res apes were obviously a scam. But the core of the NFT technology is attaching a digital title to either ephemeral or digital goods. There is nothing that said you couldn't issue and NFT that granted more rights as well.

      So if you bought dumb apes, with no additional rights, you are a poor art investor. That does not mean that people who bought high quality art are going to get burned the same way. The artists that sold quality work can go on to make more quality work, and get another(and often needed) revenue stream in addition to selling prints. That's not a scam, it's just business, and a more dignified one then having to whore themselves figuratively or literally on Patreon or as a social media "influencer".

      So let the bubble burst. Put the scammers in jail if you can. Once the air has cleared there will be room to see the parts of the scene that were actually worth something.

      1. katrinab Silver badge

        Re: He's partly right

        El Reg probably paid an artis to design their logo. They were able to do that without involving blockchains, just a standard legal contract.

        1. ThatOne Silver badge
          Devil

          Re: He's partly right

          > just a standard legal contract

          OMG that's so uncool!...

      2. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge

        Re: He's partly right

        Once the air has cleared there will be room to see the parts of the scene that were actually worth something.

        I'd love to know what anyone thinks that might be

        1. Sgt_Oddball

          Re: He's partly right

          About the only thing I've seen on NFT's (the concept not the monkeys) would involve selling tickets for events. However it does then leave the database still ticking along once the event is over.

          But really, that's about the only use case where it works from what I can see without duping people. It'd mean that the tickets could be traded freely, there's already scarcity since you know... Physics and local laws on event numbers, and since each one is an immutable token comes with a unique identify off the bat.

          But then we're already mostly there anyway with modern ticketing scanners connected to a database.... So.... Yeah.

          Fools and money.

          1. Calum Morrison

            Re: He's partly right

            IIRC, Stellantis (the company formed from the merger of Fiat Chrysler and Peugeot Citroen etc.) are using NFTs to store and track car service and condition details. With the way clocking, cloning etc. is used to defraud customers, this could actually be an unsexy but useful implementation of the technology.

          2. katrinab Silver badge
            Meh

            Re: He's partly right

            That protects the event organiser from people turning up with fake tickets.

            It doesn't protect the people who bought those fake tickets, because the blockchain can't tell them that this isn't the real ticket. You need a trusted third party, like Ticket Master, to tell you which tickets are real. And given that, you can just use them for the whole thing.

            Yes, Ticket Master is really expensive, but still a fraction of the price of minting an NFT.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: He's partly right

              -> ...a trusted third party, like Ticket Master...

              ... BWAHAHAHAHAH!!!

              1. katrinab Silver badge
                Alert

                Re: He's partly right

                Do you think 0xEA4C6F3.eth is more trustworthy than Ticket Master?

                At least Ticket Master is an actual company that you can take to court when things go wrong.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: He's partly right

        "So let the bubble burst. Put the scammers in jail if you can. Once the air has cleared there will be room to see the parts of the scene that were actually worth something."

        No need to wait, IBM have the technology to see the parts of the scene with value:

        https://www.ibm.com/blogs/research/2013/05/how-to-move-an-atom/

        We just have to get the NFT idiots cryogenically frozen first.

  2. Mike 137 Silver badge

    New approach to an old piece of fun?

    "those willingly parted from large amounts of money for the right to stand next to a picture of a cartoon chimp"

    We used to be able to do something similar by the beach at Bognor (or Brighton or wherever). You could choose between a monkey, a corpulent man or a large lady. But in that case you stood behind it so only your head showed, it was really cheap (a couple of "bob") and you took away a real physical photo afterwards that you actually owned.

    1. jake Silver badge

      Re: New approach to an old piece of fun?

      Somewhere I have a photo of some friends of mine and I at the Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk (kind of a Northern California version of Brighton Pier). Our faces are behind crudely painted pictures of a strong-man, a bikini babe, a surfer chick, a "caveman", a hippy and an astronaut. Surreal, but quite indicative of California in the mid-1960s.

    2. AdamWill

      Re: New approach to an old piece of fun?

      ...although the photographer probably still owned the copyright...

    3. Ian 55

      Re: New approach to an old piece of fun?

      Yeah, but you didn't own the copyright of those either.

  3. Mike 137 Silver badge

    Non-fungible tokens for dummies

    Congratulations Richard. That's the most accurate, clearest and simplest explanation of NFTs I've read since they emerged - "paying to stand next to the poster" - Hey!!!!

    And your final comment is right on the button. Thanks a million (the real stuff).

    1. Bachelorette

      Re: Non-fungible tokens for dummies

      That explanation's also valid for crypto currencies too except instead of standing in a queue, you are standing inside a circle and everyone is an equal owner to the poster. Except you don't really "own" the poster, you just own the right to a slot inside the circle next to the poster. And that's it. You can pay money to stand inside the circle and you receive money when you want to leave the circle.

      And it's scarce too because the circle can only hold 1 million people. If you want to enter the circle, you have to pay market price for someone to leave the circle and you to take their place.

      When everyone wants to leave the circle, good luck trying to find someone who will pay for your slot at the same price you paid for it.

      "Pegged" crypto currencies are the same thing except when too many people leave the circle, the company will buy up the empty slots to keep the price "stable" against an external price point.

    2. First Light

      Re: Non-fungible tokens for dummies

      As a non-tech person, I find this an invaluable explanation. I've looked at many other explanations in different news media and I always feel like something is missing and I don't quite get what they're on about. This is a genius explanation.

  4. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

    NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

    whats the global art market worth ?

    Paintings that look a bit like sunflowers have no intrinsic value - I can get a picture of a sunflower for free on Google Images

    Not sure the Louvre would accept the claim that it had no intrinsic value if you nicked the Mona Lisa

    1. fxkeh

      Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

      The Mona Lisa in the Louvre is a physical item of historical significance. If you painted a copy (even one that was visually identical) of the Mona Lisa it'd be worth a small fraction of the value. A receipt that says you own that copy, a significant amount less still. That's what your NFT is.

      1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

        Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

        So a digital title saying that I own the Mona Lisa and have sole rights to it has no value ?

        1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

          If you can get a fool to believe it and part money for it it has value. That fool can even make a profit if he can find a greater fool.

        2. Dinanziame Silver badge
          Happy

          Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

          Not quite; a digital title saying that you own a digital copy of the Mona Lisa, without any right to the original. Meaning that other people can make copies of the original without owing you anything. There is in fact no copyright on the Mona Lisa, since the author died centuries ago before Mickey Mouse was invented, so there are no rights you can buy or own.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

            Right but there are two cases here, if the one that the other poster asserted is a digital title detailing ACTUAL ownership of the the ACTUAL Mona Lisa painting, or a more recent work that still has a living author and even stronger IP protections, it is massively valuable. When Jackson sold his back catalog, it was about the rights

            If you buy a digital or paper receipt for the Brooklyn bridge from some dude on dark web, maybe not so much. So yeah, if you buy an NFT that confers no rights, you paid for something slightly less valuable than a signed/numbered poster print of a piece of original artwork. If you paid more for that then you would pay for a nice print, I hope you really liked the art.

            NFT's at technolot aren't the problem. People who knew nothing about art were buying bad, low effort art for too much money. Pump and dump scammers were fleecing people left and right. Like so many other the people in the halls of power looked the other way till the whole place was on fire. Law enforcement wasn't interested.

            That said, similar concerns arose with the printing press, photocopiers, and digital cameras. Last I checked they are still with us, though the printing press is mostly used for wedding invitations these days.

            1. SW10
              Stop

              Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

              a digital title detailing ACTUAL ownership of the the ACTUAL Mona Lisa painting, … is massively valuable.

              No, it really isn’t.

              The painting is valuable, the digital title is little more than a receipt. If the title for the Mona Lisa ever goes missing, that doesn’t mean the Louvre no longer owns the artwork

              1. Falmari Silver badge

                Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

                @SW10"that doesn’t mean the Louvre no longer owns the artwork"

                The Louvre does not own the Mona Lisa the French Republic does. ;)

                1. sreynolds

                  Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

                  The Louvre does not own the Mona Lisa the French Republic does. ;)

                  I believe that it had some German ownership between 1940 and 1944. I reckon you could have cashed in your NFT at some Swiss bank at that time - NOT.

                  NFTs the derivatives or the crapto world.

        3. iron Silver badge

          Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

          Exactly, because everyone knows it belongs in the Louvre so your digital reciept is fake.

        4. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge

          Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

          NFTs have no standing in law.

          But more importantly, an NFT isn't the title to the image. It's the title to a URL pointing to the image stored on a server you don't control.

        5. AdamWill

          Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

          As of right now, probably not, no, because there is basically no legislation or case law suggesting that an NFT can actually *be* a "digital title". Just because one says it is, doesn't mean it is.

          If such legislation and/or case law were to be established in enough places, maybe your digital title would wind up being worth something. It likely wouldn't work in the way web 3 purists want it to work, though, because in the real world things are messy. If you somehow contrive to steal the title to my house, a court would not then hold that you own my house. These are the sorts of safeguards that people turn out to quite like in reality. It's astonishingly unlikely that any legislature or court is going to sign off on a 'digital title' concept in which control of the NFT "digital title" alone determines legal ownership, just as they don't consider physical possession of a title deed to determine legal ownership of the property in any and all cases.

        6. Ian 55

          Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

          I have a URL that currently links to an image of a bridge that you might be interested in buying...

          1. Psmo
            Paris Hilton

            Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

            Wait... are you talking about the URL, the image or the bridge?

            Yeah I know whatever just take my money.

          2. julian.smith
            Mushroom

            Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

            I own the Brooklyn Bridge

            ... I've got the receipt on the blockchain

            1. jake Silver badge

              Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

              Utter bunkum.

              The Brooklyn Bridge is a hybrid cable-stayed suspension bridge, not a chain bridge.

      2. LionelB Silver badge

        Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

        I don't know, though... surely the financial value of any item is - by definition - the maximum that someone else is prepared to pay for it. Now if you can explain to me exactly what "intrinsic value" actually means - and, preferably, quantify it - then we have a conversation.

        Disclaimer: I worked for a mercifully brief period as a mathematical analyst for a hedge fund. The nature of the job involved first unlearning everything you thought you knew about what "money" means.

        1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

          Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

          So you would agree that a collection of pigments on a square of poplar wood, however famous, has no intrinsic value beyond what some greater fool would give you for it ?

          1. ThatOne Silver badge

            Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

            > has no intrinsic value beyond what some greater fool would give you for it ?

            Nothing actually has any value beyond what somebody might want to give you for it. Take an ingot of gold, diamonds, or some such: If nobody wants to buy them they are literally worthless. On the other hand a used paper handkerchief, if some people are willing to pay good money for it, can have value. "Value" is an eminently subjective notion, remember the saying "one man's trash is another man's treasure".

          2. LionelB Silver badge

            Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

            Read my post again: I can neither agree nor disagree until I know what you intend by the term "intrinsic value".

      3. LybsterRoy Silver badge

        Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

        I'll bite - what is the historical significance of the Mona Lisa? Its an old painting - anything else?

        1. Ian 55

          Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

          Well, the guy who held the brush that made the marks is pretty famous.

          So is the provenance of the painting.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

            Not only. The painting itself marks a deep change in painting style - it's "innovative" - far more than NFTs.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      rm -rf "Louvre"

      1. sreynolds

        Re: rm -rf "Louvre"

        Don't do that, it only increases the value of the masters others works - like those picassos in private hards.

    3. jake Silver badge

      Re: NFTs have no intrinsic value whatsoever, but have sold for multiple millions.

      Who said anything about art?

      We are talking about NFTs.

    4. This post has been deleted by its author

  5. Mark 85

    Thomas Tusser was right.*

    Fool and money being parted. Too many fools these days with too much money and not knowing where to spend it.

    * Yes, this is the guy who said it. Not PT Barnum.

    1. jake Silver badge

      Re: Thomas Tusser was right.*

      Apparently it was actually said about Barnum, by David Hannum, in reference to Barnum's part in the Cardiff Giant hoax. Or so the story goes.

      Yes, Tusser wrote a variation on this theme. Specifically "A foole and his monie be soone at debate, which after with sorrow repents him too late.[0]

      My gut feeling is that one variation or another of the phrase has been in widespread use longer than humans have understood the concept of writing. It probably goes back to the thoughts of the first proto-shaman, separating the ignorant from their meager scavenged food because his cave or hollow tree looked scary. Cushiest job in Africa a couple million years ago, I'm sure.

      [0] From: FIUE HUNDRED POINTES OF GOOD HUSBANDRIE. —Thomas Tusser, 1573 ... If you haven't read the works of Tusser, I highly recommend it. Makes you realize how very little Humans have changed in 500 years.

      1. ThatOne Silver badge
        Devil

        Re: Thomas Tusser was right.*

        > how very little Humans have changed in 500 years.

        You forgot at least three zeros, didn't you...

        1. jake Silver badge

          Re: Thomas Tusser was right.*

          To the best of my knowledge, Tusser wasn't writing that long ago.

          I've read a few very early cuneiform tablets that might go back nearly one extra zero, though ... but that's all proto-literacy and contains nothing more than primitive accounting information.

          Note that Homo Sap probably only dates back to 300,000(ish) years ago.

          1. ThatOne Silver badge

            Re: Thomas Tusser was right.*

            > Note that Homo Sap probably only dates back to 300,000(ish) years ago.

            Sure, it was just a joke...

            (Although we do step here in uncharted, or at least very vaguely charted territory: Was Neanderthal actually a "sapiens" or not?... AFAIK he could reach that far back (but I agree this is a futile case of childish one-upmanship and beg your pardon).)

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Never heard of the "Greater Fool Theory"...

    ...But is seems bang-on.

    Dunning-Krugerrangs indeed...

    1. cornetman Silver badge

      Re: Never heard of the "Greater Fool Theory"...

      Another example of this idea:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffO3VxzQReM

  7. anthonyhegedus Silver badge

    Excellent explanation. It just helps validate my unswerving assertion that bitcoins and the like have no real real-world application; they're just used for criminal activity and scamming in general.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      You just proved the opposite of your point didn't you?

      Monero and whatever they are calling the latest Silk Road knockoff these days proved the technology works beyond the shadow of a doubt.

      Billions of £/$/€ all circulating between people who literally commit crime for a living. Sort of like the WiFi at Defcon, if it works there at all, it actually works.

      The main problems with Crypto at this point are people unwillingness to pull the plug on grandpa's old proof-of-work protocols, and the fact that Visa and MC can spend billions to make sure that I can't use some modern Crypto to pay for a soda at the corner grocery. Instead we pay trillions to companies to act as gatekeeps to all commerce, and get fraud, high fees, and terrible service in return.

      Also, the public transaction ledgers actually helped law enforcement solve crimes (once the % that are smart enough to balance their own checkbook bothered looking).

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: You just proved the opposite of your point didn't you?

        [Visa and MC can spend billions to make sure that I can't use some modern Crypto to pay for a soda at the corner grocery. Instead we pay trillions to companies to act as gatekeeps to all commerce, and get fraud, high fees, and terrible service in return.]

        Utter rubbish. Please provide some evidence.

      2. First Light

        Re: You just proved the opposite of your point didn't you?

        You mean the Monero guy who just got charge with 378 counts of fraud in South Africa?

        https://finbold.com/monero-co-founder-fluffypony-charged-with-378-charges-of-fraud/

  8. Exact Circus
    Pint

    None dare call it tokenism

    This too is art:

    https://youtu.be/prVRwXAWFeA

    Cryptocurrencies - when you think you're rich, they think they think you think you really know.

  9. Doctor Syntax Silver badge
    Devil

    A word of reassurance to Bitcoin holders. Losing 30% of Monday's value in a week is OK. It can lose 30% on next Monday's value next week and keep on doing that for ever and still end each week with 70% of what it started the week with.

    1. Spoobistle
      Holmes

      A pipe-smoker comments...

      "From now on, the Bitcoin in the real world is worth 30% or so less in terms of other currencies. That doesn’t mean, of course, that the Bitcoin here in Cyberspace, in your Wallet or USB stick or Cloud storage, has been devalued."

      - with apologies to Harold Wilson, who would doubtless have sported a flat cap.

      1. Richard Tobin

        Re: A pipe-smoker comments...

        Wilson was not entirely wrong. The pound was devalued by 14% against the dollar, but that didn't mean that people could buy 14% less of the things they actually spent money on. Inflation at that time was well below 5%. Even if you wanted to buy dollars, the exchange controls dating from the second world war still limited what you could convert.

        No-one, on the other hand, buys anything real with Bitcoin. If you actually want to buy something, you convert it to real money, so a 30% fall is really that.

        1. Ken Hagan Gold badge

          Re: A pipe-smoker comments...

          That might have been true on the day he said it, but imports became more expensive the following day and inflation eventually adjusted the value of the pound in your pocket to make Harold a liar.

          Proof that politicians have always been willing to insult the electorate's intelligence if they think it will make the awkward question go away until later.

        2. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

          Re: A pipe-smoker comments...

          > pound was devalued by 14% against the dollar, .. but that didn't mean that people could buy 14% less of the things they actually spent money on.

          Unless the things they were buying are priced in dollars - like oil

  10. Androgynous Cow Herd

    as I have said before

    A Fool and his money are some party

  11. JimmyPage Silver badge

    Speaking of things that have no intrinsic value

    hows that pound sterling looking ?

    1. Neil Barnes Silver badge

      Re: Speaking of things that have no intrinsic value

      Not so bloody good this last couple of weeks, given that my pension is paid in Sterling but I spend in Euros...

      1. Falmari Silver badge

        Re: Speaking of things that have no intrinsic value

        The exchange rate £1 - €1.17 is the same as it was a year ago 16 June 2021 what strange coincidence.

        Not that is any comfort to you Neil seeing it was at £1 - €1.21, 15 April 2022 :(

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Speaking of things that have no intrinsic value

      that's six people need to learn what "intrinsic" means ...

  12. This post has been deleted by its author

  13. trevorde Silver badge

    NFTs explained (again)

    > imagine if you went up to the mona lisa and you were like "i'd like to own this" and someone nearby went "give me 65 million dollars and i'll burn down an unspecified amount of the amazon rainforest in order to give you this receipt of purchase" so you paid them and they went "here's your receipt, thank you for your purchase" and went to an unmarked supply closet in the back of the museum and posted a handmade label inside it behind the brooms that said "mona lisa currently owned by jacobgalapagos" so if anyone wants to know who owns it they'd have to find this specific closet in this specific hallway and look behind the correct brooms. and you went "can i take the mona lisa home now" and they went "oh god no are you stupid? you only bought the receipt that says you own it, you didn't actually buy the mona lisa itself, you can't take the real mona lisa you idiot. you CAN take this though." and gave you the replica print in a cardboard tube that's sold in the gift shop. also the person selling you the receipt of purchase has at no point in time ever owned the mona lisa.

    > unfortunately, if this doesnt really make sense or seem like any logical person would be happy about this exchange, then you've understood it perfectly

    https://imgur.com/NJirDQp

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: NFTs explained (again)

      So if I buy some IBM shares on Robinhood and that only exists in a ledger somewhere then I don't really own any of IBM and i can't go to IBM and take a bit of the their building ?

      I only really own part of the company if they give me a share certificate printed in copperplate on vellum ?

      1. Blitterbug
        Facepalm

        Re: NFTs explained (again)

        Shares are fungible

  14. Howard Sway Silver badge

    there will be a "greater fool" who will buy it for more than you did

    Almost. The "greater fool" theory is so named because at some point there won't be a greater fool willing to buy it, and the last fool who did will be exposed as such.

    Last week's perfect example : NFT collector sells pixel art toad at a $1 million loss

    It wasn't even a pixel art toad. It was a pixel art toad skeleton.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: there will be a "greater fool" who will buy it for more than you did

      But are the previous "fools" who sold it to the current fool and actually made a profit and got out, really fools?

      1. iron Silver badge

        Re: there will be a "greater fool" who will buy it for more than you did

        Yes because if they had been slightly less lucky they would have been the ones left hodling the bag when the bottom dropped out of it.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: there will be a "greater fool" who will buy it for more than you did

        Like any pyramid style scheme, it's more of a spectrum, with the shark to suckerfish ratio changing rapidly from the initial transactions to the later ones.

        Though if you look at the trading activity, many of these NFT collections underwent multiple and sustained shell transactions designed to simulate healthy trading activity and interest. It's about as honest as a game of Three Card Monty(which is to say it isn't honest at all, and anyone you see who looks like they resold one of those crap NFTs is almost certainly a shill). That's how you spot the sharks, and how they spot the suckers.

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Joke

    You're all wrong

    You're all wrong. I find NFTs are perfect for moving tax losses around my various offshore companies. So easy to create the exact value required without having the bore of actually going to an art gallery and pretending to like the thing you're buying. Even worse is when the artist wants to meet you.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Shh, the first rule

      of high value art fraud club is not to talk about the rules of high value art fraud.

    2. katrinab Silver badge
      Facepalm

      Re: You're all wrong

      You move profits around your offshore companies and keep the losses onshore.

      1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

        Re: You're all wrong

        Yes but that requires you to have a company with profits.

        The advantage of art is that I can say to a Columbian Artisnal Pharmaceutical Grower - I really like that scrawl stuck on your fridge door, it really speaks to me, put it up for auction at Sotherbys and I will pay $100M for it.

        The gentleman can then bank that perfectly clean money, without even paying tax in most countries, I can deposit the masterpiece in a vault in Luxembourg's special evil-villain tax-free zone and use it as collateral for a $100M loan from any reputable (or Swiss) bank

  16. sreynolds

    These fools don't listen....

    I believe the amount of due diligence performed by those that bought crypto is inversely proportional to the amount "invested" by them.

  17. The Central Scrutinizer

    "Now, who wants a spot in my queue"?

    Would that be the near queue or the far queue?

    Anyone who believes that NFTs have any value can contact me about this bridge I have for sale. It's right on Sydney harbour and the views are spectacular, dahlink.

    1. mevets

      ejit

      1 BTC is worth about $21K today. They obviously have value, I can trade them for money which I can turn into anything. Whether they have persistent value is the real question; whether they are investment grade is the next. The price of anything, from gold to polished sand is based on what they buyer will pay.

      ps: when over privileged dicks start scowling about how valueless something is, there is probably a good reason to take more than a passing interest in it.

      1. julian.smith
        Boffin

        The Oracle of Omaha

        Warren said he wouldn't pay $25 for all of the Bitcoin in the world.

        What would he know?

        Soon $25 for the lot might be the highest bid.

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    the greater fool theory

    This is a nice explanation. Surely one I'll remember !

    I never though, when I was a dev, that the motto "make it fool-proof, and the Universe will come up with a better fool", would see, one day, people "make" money out of it ...

  19. anthonyhegedus Silver badge

    it's just gambling...

    ...it's speculation on a product which doesn't exist. an NFT is proof that I have that NFT, nothing more. OK, you can make money out of it, but it's not a real product that actually does anything. Like Cryptocurrency, it's totally virtual. There's a reason that you can use crypto to actually buy very much. The currency's only value is in trading it. It also ruins the planet with its 'proof of work'.

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Cryptocurrencies likewise have no inherent value.

    Incorrect. The value is derived from the financial cost of the electricity and hardware required to produce one.

  21. Ythermos

    Your source for Bill Gates vaccine microchips is a joke tweet? Amazing journalism bravo

    1. Excellentsword (Written by Reg staff)

      Hey thanks, it's comments like these that keep us going

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like