Does Second Life plan to get into NFTs ?

[richelieu Glom]

40 minutes ago, MarissaOrloff said:

Since LL does not allow the use of L$ to be used for real world purchases I don't really see the point of owning an NFT within SL if you can't take it out of the metaverse. 

Well it truly depends on what type of NFT you plan to create. As I said earlier, there are games like Decentraland where people use real money to buy virtual land, like Second Life, so the idea is not to take that land out of the metaverse. People could buy land in Second Life then resell it if it gains value or simply keep it for themselves and play on it like regular SL residents. The difference here is that most NFTs are currently working on Ethereum's blockchain (explaining this is a whole different story), so technically, this could attract more investors to Second Life. There are so many things to say about this, because it is a whole new technology that can be used for different things. I gave an example, LL could create a specific world for this and create a city/community specifically designed for this, where people will be able to buy land, art, and keep it there. 

I don't understand why those clowns are trolling, when it won't affect their SL experience. That girl who talks about being an anti-capitalist, but plays second life and wants to complain about NFTs, what a joke. 

[Solar Legion]

Ah yes, and there's that age old, tired out ploy - if they don't agree with you, why they must be a troll/be trolling! There can be no other explanation!

[Coffee Pancake]

23 minutes ago, richelieu Glom said:

People could buy land in Second Life then resell it if it gains value or simply keep it for themselves and play on it like regular SL residents.

This is how the SL land market has worked for over 18 years already.

23 minutes ago, richelieu Glom said:

The difference here is that most NFTs are currently working on Ethereum's blockchain (explaining this is a whole different story), so technically, this could attract more investors to Second Life.

Land investors .. Oh wait, we already have LOTS of those ! See premium mainland estates like Bay City, Sherm or Horizons.

23 minutes ago, richelieu Glom said:

There are so many things to say about this, because it is a whole new technology that can be used for different things. I gave an example, LL could create a specific world for this and create a city/community specifically designed for this, where people will be able to buy land, art, and keep it there. 

But we can do all of these things already. No buzzword bingo required!

23 minutes ago, richelieu Glom said:

I don't understand why those clowns are trolling, when it won't affect their SL experience.

Then what's the point? If there is no gain for people in SL, why add it to SL?

 

 

[Lucia Nightfire]

13 hours ago, richelieu Glom said:

Hello,

After learning about NFTs, and visiting virtual Games such as Decentraland, I thought that Second Life could implement this new "technology." I spent a few hours in Decentraland and honestly, I don't know what motivates people to buy virtual land in such game, with poor graphics, when Second Life does a better job graphically speaking. I looked around and I didn't see anything related to NFTs in Second Life. I don't know if this is related to Linden's strict rules when it comes to the economy of the game (maybe?). Second Life has been around for quite some time, I left the game a few years ago for several reasons (one of them being that I thought the game was getting old and failed to renew itself). Nevertheless, I feel like this game has the potential to be something bigger with the blockchain technology, NFTs and more. I don't know if there is a way to directly ask this question to Linden Lab.... Do they have something plan related to this? Peace.

Secondlife already has enough facets about it that, after use, leaves one feeling empty. Why do we need to add NFTs on top of that?

[Qie Niangao]

4 hours ago, richelieu Glom said:

 The difference here is that most NFTs are currently working on Ethereum's blockchain (explaining this is a whole different story), so technically, this could attract more investors to Second Life.

From the start of this thread I had a hunch this was all about sprinkling magic ETH pixie dust over the functionally equivalent asset class of no-copy+no-mod SL objects. "Functionally equivalent," that is, from a collector's standpoint and hence, presumably, identical underlying asset value, but lacking the blockchain-bedazzled "investor" attraction.

So maybe that's wrong. If there's more, I'd like to hear how SL NFTs would differ functionally from NC+NM objects such that any actual value is added. (Obviously a staggering amount of cost would be added.)

One possibility might be the ability to "preserve" the NFT asset after SL ceases to exist. That seems an exceptionally abstract asset, though, so many layers removed from anything tangible.

[SynesthetiQ]

Right out the gate, I have to admit I don't quite understand the immediate antipathy and apparent resentment to what seems a perfectly reasonable enquiry from Richelieu.

My response assumes that anyone reading and/or responding to this thread does indeed understand what an NFT is (the market for which exceeded £2Bn in the first quarter of 2021), and what the Ethereum blockchain is (the market cap for which exceeded $500Bn in the first quarter of 2021)

I also assume (hopefully), that the same audience has some appreciation of the fact that pejorative and dismissive language like "pixie dust" and "buzzword" in association with these technologies shows a certain isolationist and almost luddite view of the world in 2021.

From my perspective then, it isn't so much that SL would provide a proprietary market for NFTs, it's that it provides an integrated platform for the creation of NFTs which might subsequently be marketed and appreciated within SL, but which might also find an open market and intrinsic value in the big wide world outside SL. 

I'm not quite sure therefore why vastly experienced SL practitioners find this a difficult pill to swallow.

From my perspective as a relative noob, I see that much creativity exhibited within SL is actually created externally in Blender and (with some script support) Unity3D and imported via standard DAE format - the very same tools currently used to create NFTs on other platforms. SL is then just one possible channel for these artefacts.

In addition (and in the opposite direction), much unique artwork in the form of images, artwork, video, fashion, dance and movement is created within SL and exported to other platforms (Flickr and YouTube to name but 2) - all of which may very easily (and admittedly at some non trivial cost) be moved to Ethereum as unique NFTs.

I've seen beautiful examples of artwork which merge landscapes, fashions, movement, music, models into a seamless unique experience.. with the right approach this might be shared widely outside SL, have IP protected by default and realise true value in terms of audience and revenue.

Why then would talented SL creatives (who seem to spend a disproportionate amount of time and effort trying to ensure IP protection) ask WHY? The real question as far as I'm concerned would be WHY NOT?

As a final aside, I've also talked in a previous post about how differing strategies for the future of SL may impact residents and creatives alike. To see that Richelieu asks a timely question we only need to read this SL blog post from earlier in the month 

 

to realise that perhaps the new owners of SL are already considering strategic partnerships with modern in-game asset and experience experts such as https://www.epik.gg/

 

Edited August 30, 2021 by SynesthetiQ

[Qie Niangao]

56 minutes ago, SynesthetiQ said:

Why then would talented SL creatives (who seem to spend a disproportionate amount of time and effort trying to ensure IP protection) ask WHY? The real question as far as I'm concerned would be WHY NOT?

No, the question is still very much "WHY" and the reason it smells to pixie dust is that all the posts are about how great it would be, if only we lame Luddites understood, because everybody's doin' it.

It would dispel a lot of skepticism if there were a specific example of a thing for which there'd be a plausible market relying on some integration between SL and the NFT asset class. Of course anybody at any time can mint an NFT of an SL asset or (better I think) a record of an SL event—go for it—but how does that benefit from any integration whatsoever with SL itself? Or if this isn't about integration, what is it about?

[SynesthetiQ]

1 hour ago, Qie Niangao said:

No, the question is still very much "WHY" and the reason it smells to pixie dust is that all the posts are about how great it would be, if only we lame Luddites understood, because everybody's doin' it.

It would dispel a lot of skepticism if there were a specific example of a thing for which there'd be a plausible market relying on some integration between SL and the NFT asset class. Of course anybody at any time can mint an NFT of an SL asset or (better I think) a record of an SL event—go for it—but how does that benefit from any integration whatsoever with SL itself? Or if this isn't about integration, what is it about?

Hello Qie,

If you don't mind I won't respond to your very reductive first paragraph. From my perspective the WHY of addressing the current external NFT market for SL creatives is pretty clear. If you don't agree then you don't agree.

In my defence however I would say that nowhere in the thread have I read the supporting reasoning to include "because everybody's doing it" - at the very least I think you're indulging in a bit of "straw man" rhetoric there.

In terms of the benefits of an "Integration" with an NFT minting service - versus manually exporting an SL asset in a common digital format and then subsequently minting using an external tool; I would agree that the use cases haven't yet been outlined and thus it's difficult to say what the benefits would be. That's the domain of innovation after all, which is what SL creators do beautifully!

I genuinely think however, given we see no trend towards an increasing SL population and hence internal market for SL creators, it might be the case that NFTs as a rapidly increasing channel would be a very profitable one to explore - whatever mechanism is used to address that channel in the short term.

Given this perspective, and it may be that you refute such a perspective (only time will tell who is right 😀),  there is often a business opportunity when it comes to removing friction to a new and profitable market. This is what a native SL integration and/or NFT marketplace would provide.

To reiterate, the point of this would be to allow SL creators the opportunity to leverage the beautiful integrative platform which is SL to address the external and huge/growing market for NFTs outside of SL.

As for your last sentence "if it isn't about integration, what is it about?", I apologise if my reasoning has been somewhat opaque, however I believe I have done my best to set my perspective out on that.

Either way, the blog entry I referenced in my earlier post (and repeated here for clarity) would seem to at least hint at some sort of experimental MVP in this area by the owners of SL coming in the short to medium term(I admit that is my forecast timeline and again, only time will tell!)

 

Edited August 30, 2021 by SynesthetiQ

[Mollymews]

1 hour ago, SynesthetiQ said:

To reiterate, the point of this would be to allow SL creators the opportunity to leverage the beautiful integrative platform which is SL to address the external and huge/growing market for NFTs outside of SL.

 

the point of NFT is to simulate an RL physical resource. Which is finite. When finite resources are consumed then scarcity results.  To simulate this virtually then we arbitrarily put a cap on it - pick  a number.  End result = simulated scarcity.  The whole blockchain asset thing is predicated on simulating scarcity

the issue that you may not be considering is that this model doesn't work for those who make virtual products for the virtual mass market (main street) in which there is no virtual scarcity of resources. The manufacturing plant for a virtual product intended for Main Street is limitless. Make one item then press copy, and the plant will chug on manufacturing copies forever

just say Linden did want to simulate scarcity then they don't need any blockchain tech to do this

Linden would only have to announce they will not be hosting anymore regions than they are now.  What there is, is all there will ever be forever more. And residents can still trade land

 

 

Edited August 30, 2021 by Mollymews
residents

[SynesthetiQ]

25 minutes ago, Mollymews said:

the point of NFT is to simulate an RL physical resource. Which is finite. When finite resources are consumed then scarcity results.  To simulate this virtually then we arbitrarily put a cap on it - pick  a number.  End result = simulated scarcity.  The whole blockchain asset thing is predicated on simulating scarcity

the issue that you may not be considering is that this model doesn't work for those who make virtual products for the virtual mass market (main street) in which there is no virtual scarcity of resources. The manufacturing plant for a virtual product intended for Main Street is limitless. Make one item then press copy, and the plant will chug on manufacturing copies forever

just say Linden did want to simulate scarcity then they don't need any blockchain tech to do this

Linden would only have to announce they will not be hosting anymore regions than they are now.  What there is, is all there will ever be forever more. And people can still trade land

 

 

Hi Molly

I do appreciate your response, however your depiction and understanding of NFTs is not accurate or correct.

Apologies for being so direct, however any other response would mean we were discussing and talking about something completely different.

Or worse still I'd just come across as a pompous idiot by explaining the subject (or at least my understanding of the subject) - I know, that ship has sailed 😀

I'm obviously happy to talk about supply and demand, the economics of virtual artefacts and all that good stuff, but we wouldn't be talking specifically about NFTs anymore.

Edited August 30, 2021 by SynesthetiQ

[Mollymews]

1 minute ago, SynesthetiQ said:

Hi Molly

I do appreciate your response, however your depiction and understanding of NFTs is not accurate or correct.

Apologies for being so direct, however any other response would mean we were discussing and talking about something completely different.

Or worse still I'd just come across as a pompous idiot by explaining the subject.. I know, that ship has sailed 😀

I'm obviously happy to talk about supply and demand, the economics of virtual artefacts and all that good stuff, but we wouldn't be talking specifically about NFTs.

i can only go off what you write. Which was about NFTs which is what I quoted

we can't talk about bitcoin generating tech or services like Decentraland which are predicated on the same tech without talking about simulated scarcity, which is intrinsic to the model

we can also talk about proof of ownership that blockchain tech provides, but so to can a SQL database and a report writer

for sure blockchain tech is kinda cool, but then so too are the stores from Apple, Microsoft, Google, etc for digital products. None of these  stores see any need for blockchain tech to stimulate user growth

and yes for sure, people who do create in SL can move their products onto any of the NFT markets, some are doing this already themselves. They don't need Linden to facilitate this for them. Which is maybe your point , that Linden should

 

[SynesthetiQ]

1 minute ago, Mollymews said:

i can only go off what you write. Which was about NFTs which is what I quoted

we can't talk about bitcoin generating tech or services like Decentraland which are predicated on the same tech without talking about simulated scarcity, which is intrinsic to the model

we can also talk about proof of ownership that blockchain tech provides, but so to can a SQL database and a report writer

for sure blockchain tech is kinda cool, but then so too are the stores from Apple, Microsoft, Google, etc for digital products. None of these  stores see any need for blockchain tech to stimulate user growth

and yes for sure, people who do create in SL can move their products onto any of the NFT markets, some are doing this already themselves. They don't need Linden to facilitate this for them. Which is maybe your point , that Linden should

 

Thanks Molly,

It's all really interesting and apologies if my last post was a bit high handed.

I think we're all just feeling our way and trying to make sense of what the next few years might bring.

The only thing that's certain is it's unlikely to be like the last few years!

Either way, always good to discuss with other engaged people 😀

[Mollymews]

15 minutes ago, SynesthetiQ said:

I think we're all just feeling our way and trying to make sense of what the next few years might bring.

a thing about why you are getting a little bit of pushback from some of the seasoned SL residents on here

is because much of what Decentraland is offering has already been done in Second Life

and some of the promises, particularly around ownership of virtual land, being made by the Decentraland owner are quite fraught. The Second Life owner in the beginning made the same promises about residents owning their land, which all came unstuck in the California courts system when Linden got sued over it, when they banned a resident from the platform for manipulating the system to the resident's advantage

Decentraland have also said that in the event that they can no longer host the virtual land which their users own  then they (Decentraland) have a contingency plan, but they can't say what it is exactly

which I suppose could mean that because the token to  proof land ownership is included in the etherium blockchain then that will always be the case. The land owner continues to hold the land title which they can proof. Just that the land to which the title attests can't be accessed anymore thru a future non-existent Decentraland world server

[SynesthetiQ]

38 minutes ago, Mollymews said:

a thing about why you are getting a little bit of pushback from some of the seasoned SL residents on here

is because much of what Decentraland is offering has already been done in Second Life

and some of the promises, particularly around ownership of virtual land, being made by the Decentraland owner are quite fraught. The Second Life owner in the beginning made the same promises about residents owning their land, which all came unstuck in the California courts system when Linden got sued over it, when they banned a resident from the platform for manipulating the system to the resident's advantage

Decentraland have also said that in the event that they can no longer host the virtual land which their users own  then they (Decentraland) have a contingency plan, but they can't say what it is exactly

which I suppose could mean that because the token to  proof land ownership is included in the etherium blockchain then that will always be the case. The land owner continues to hold the land title which they can proof. Just that the land to which the title attests can't be accessed anymore thru a future non-existent Decentraland world server

Hi again Molly,

A bit of confusion I think.

I'm no great proponent of Decentraland at all, in fact quite the reverse - but that's a discussion for another day.

I was mainly just talking about the opportunity to create unique works of art in SL and publish those as NFTs to the Ethereum blockchain.

I thought that for artists within SL who are creating genuinely unique digital artworks this would be a good way to guarantee IP protection and safe transfer of IP across all digital media. particularly given the almost exponential increase in the NFT market (for now at any rate) vs the relatively stagnant market of SL.

Whether this was via export from SL and then minting via a 3rd party; or whether LL saw this as a way to leverage SL as a unique creative platform and integrate the minting process to reduce channel friction - all moot from my perspective.

As with all new digital initiatives and stores of value there are potential risks as well as rewards so I completely understand a certain level of reticence and caution - maybe not the outright aggression - but hey, what can you do?

As you say though, there seems to be a lot of "pushback" on these boards in general across a lot of topics, particularly those that suggest changes to the status quo - just the culture I guess.

Genuine thanks for the interesting dialogue, but I can sense the "seasoned residents" circling, so will now bow out of this thread gracefully 😀

[Ansariel Hiller]

14 hours ago, Coffee Pancake said:

 

[Alwin Alcott]

1 hour ago, SynesthetiQ said:

As you say though, there seems to be a lot of "pushback" on these boards in general across a lot of topics, particularly those that suggest changes to the status quo - just the culture I guess.

"we"  are not against changes .. but  many of us are quite experienced in the case anything, even the smallest change has to be made.. .. it will make one, and break ten other things. Not even dare to think about changes to the code... god save us.
 

And of course.. what would a change or new thing mean for SL .. is it usefull for the mass or happy few. For me personal a digital have to have, one of a kind "thingy" is worthless, won't even pay 1 L$ for it.

Edited August 30, 2021 by Alwin Alcott

[Niri Nebula]

Please don't. I didn't read any of this thread, but we're already just... a gajillion servers ruining the planet, just as SL alone, if we add blockchain to that, we might as well ***** in our ozone layer directly.

THE CLIMATE CONTROVERSY SWIRLING AROUND NFTS

[Coffee Pancake]

2 hours ago, SynesthetiQ said:

As you say though, there seems to be a lot of "pushback" on these boards in general across a lot of topics, particularly those that suggest changes to the status quo - just the culture I guess.

Far from it, but a certain bar must be met.

It has to have some use. To users of Second Life. In Second Life.

 

Despite all the pontificating, no one has yet managed to come up with a SINGLE use case for NTF's in SL. Not one.

 

Why would I, as a customer, creator, open source developer and user of SL want to NFT anything in SL?

How would this improve the experience here beyond the current offering?

How does this create value for SL? (rather than add more value to the ETH blockchain).

 

2 hours ago, SynesthetiQ said:

Genuine thanks for the interesting dialogue, but I can sense the "seasoned residents" circling, so will now bow out of this thread gracefully 😀

If you can't even sell it on the forums, to technically savvy users, how do you expect to sell this to the wider SL user base or LL.

If SL users show sufficient interest in having something, LL will pay attention and put serious consideration into making it work. Open source developers will step up to contribute their time with viewer integrations.

But so far the argument for NTF's has been - If you're not sufficiently enthralled by the buzzword, you're too stoopid to understand.

Edited August 30, 2021 by Coffee Pancake

[animats]

9 hours ago, Mollymews said:

Decentraland have also said that in the event that they can no longer host the virtual land which their users own  then they (Decentraland) have a contingency plan, but they can't say what it is exactly

Decentraland is far more centralized than they admit. The servers are centralized, the servers and clients are closed source, you can't run your own server or client, and management reserves the right to kick you off. Nobody actually goes there much. They have about 200-300 concurrent users. (You can see their server stats here. 218 users connected right now.) As for their NFT art, it's unimpressive.

The combination of Fear of Missing Out and NFTs as a vehicle for money-laundering is driving the NFT market. Also, many of the trades and are fake, made between cooperating parties to push the posted price up. The widely-publicized Beeple deal is widely considered to be one of those. But that's another discussion.

6 hours ago, Coffee Pancake said:

Despite all the pontificating, no one has yet managed to come up with a SINGLE use case for NFT's in SL. Not one.

It's technically possible to build an NFT system as an SL user to move non-copy objects between grids, for objects set up for that by their creators. The effort to set all that up probably exceeds the revenue potential.

An SL island of NFT galleries is quite possible. If you got enough "crypto influencers" to promote this (crypto influencer endorsements sell for about US$30,000 to US$40,000) you might be able to find enough suckers to make it profitable. Interest by existing SL users is likely to be very low, although some creators might go for it. Especially ones who had a gacha business with their own stuff and need a new market. Then we could all go to the galleries, admire, criticize, have gallery openings, wine and cheese, etc. SL has better artists than Decentraland does, and good NFT art would look better in SL surroundings than it does in Decentraland.

As usual, the main headache is that new user onboarding to SL is so hard.

[Mollymews]

9 hours ago, SynesthetiQ said:

Genuine thanks for the interesting dialogue, but I can sense the "seasoned residents" circling, so will now bow out of this thread gracefully 😀

on the off-chance that you might come back. Some more thoughts

as has been mentioned by others previously, the Second Life NFT is the No-Modify No-Copy Transfer permissions object

this is a non-fungible token. It can be proofed that it is non-fungible with these permissions and with the public read-only property settings: OBJECT_OWNER, OBJECT_CREATOR and OBJECT_CREATION_TIME

consider the suggestion that these objects be registerable on a publicly accessible blockchain to proof creator and owner to the world beyond Second Life. And this public register would stimulate growth in users, and stimulate market growth in the virtual economy

for NFT to grow trade volume then there has to be a market that buyers are willing to participate in. A primary market (buy/obtain from the creator) and a secondary market (buy/obtain from the current owner).

Second Life has this market that some residents are willing to participate in. Currently the Gacha mechanism is the driver for it. Going forward from 1 September the market driver will be the new Conveyor mechanism  

so what is the current size of the Second Life NFT market ?

only Linden can give a definitive answer. But we can estimate what the primary market size is

on the Second Life Marketplace, it shows that in the Gachas section there are about 930k listings offered for resale by the current owners. Comparing this to the mass market listing volume of 7.9 million items then 0.93 / 7.9 = 11%

11% of total listings is an indicator of the primary market size. 11% is not insignificant but this number has come after 17 years of SL market trading

prior to the Gacha storm of recent years, going back to about 2007/2008 the market for No-Copy Transfer items was quite a lot higher percentage-wise (particularly in the home and garden furnishing sector) but as the residents preferred to buy Copy items then the market demanded for No-Copy items dwindled, resurrected by Gacha to the level it is today

my point in all of this is while a technology might have a benefit for creatives and a subset of buyers, the technologies that win the market are those that are good for the greatest number of mass market customers

so my comment about seasoned residents. SL residents have lived, worked, played and survived  thru nearly 2 decades of the market vagaries of technology as both creators and buyers of digital consumer products. And many of the residents have lots of experience in the multitude of other online offerings over the last nearly 20 years, veterans even of pretty much most things internet

and they and the owner of this platform, Linden Lab, are still standing. So we should expect some circling, when this experience is seemingly treated as irrelevant in the brave new world of the future internet. The seasoned residents have been living in the brave new world of the internet since its inception, and will continue to do so. Dealing with tech advances as they have always done. With open arms, along with a healthy dose of skepticism and a touch of cynicism for the promise of "this time will be awesome"

 

[Coffee Pancake]

2 hours ago, animats said:

An SL island of NFT galleries is quite possible. If you got enough "crypto influencers" to promote this (crypto influencer endorsements sell for about US$30,000 to US$40,000) you might be able to find enough suckers to make it profitable.

But that's the problem. If it appeals to the demographic targeted by crypto influencers, it will have zero actual value. It's just one big hype driven circle jerk, pump pump pump pump and don't be left holding the can when the big boys take a dump. Elon didn't get out of crypto for ideological reasons, he pumped it up as far as he dared, sold his positions and then crashed the markets - who's to say he didn't buy back his positions on the quiet at a much lower rate. Who looses when that happens? It's not the influencers and large funds, it's all the chumps that got sucked in for the ride. We saw the same hype bubble with meme stocks, diamond hands to the moon .. SIKE SUCKERS!

A SL NFT gallery would be no different, all fun and games, right up to the moment it's not. Didn't we do this already ?

[Lucia Nightfire]

Someone make this meme caption:

"I don't always log into a soulless husk of an MMO, but when I do, it's one that offers NFTs."

😆

[Qie Niangao]

10 hours ago, animats said:

An SL island of NFT galleries is quite possible.

You didn't take this in the direction I thought you were going, but maybe that's for the best. What I was turning around in my head was the possibility of using SL as a visual catalog of NFTs created from all over, especially those for sale or auction on OpenSea and the like. The rationale would be that some NFTs don't represent simple static 2D graphics easily shown on a website, and maybe with a little creativity they could be better shown on SL. Not that I can concoct a good example, but maybe, in theory.

Of course the fatal flaw is already identified: Exactly nobody will first learn SL in order to shop for NFTs, no matter how compellingly they may be presented.

Tangentially, I stumbled on this more general critique of the whole art token market by one of NFT's co-inventors, Anil Dash, in the April Atlantic: "NFTs weren't supposed to end like this".

[Rowan Amore]

2 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

You didn't take this in the direction I thought you were going, but maybe that's for the best. What I was turning around in my head was the possibility of using SL as a visual catalog of NFTs created from all over, especially those for sale or auction on OpenSea and the like. The rationale would be that some NFTs don't represent simple static 2D graphics easily shown on a website, and maybe with a little creativity they could be better shown on SL. Not that I can concoct a good example, but maybe, in theory.

Of course the fatal flaw is already identified: Exactly nobody will first learn SL in order to shop for NFTs, no matter how compellingly they may be presented.

Tangentially, I stumbled on this more general critique of the whole art token market by one of NFT's co-inventors, Anil Dash, in the April Atlantic: "NFTs weren't supposed to end like this".

Thanks for the article.  It was very informative.  I took note of this quote especially since it speaks directly to the OP.

One major challenge is that the blockchain has, at present, approximately zero uses for the typical consumer. Theoretical uses abound, but no ordinary person is choosing a blockchain-based technology over its traditional counterpart.

[Ardy Lay]

Y'all sure have a lot of energy.