> Who can make a 50's era baseball card?

Any decently print operation? The MLB would come after them if they tried to sell them, of course, but it's not like pictures on cardstock is a tougher technology to recreate than NFT.

Both are only worth something because of their provenance, ease of manufacturing is irrelevant.

You're not going to be able to sell a forged baseball card at Christie's. You can't prove its provenance, and it wouldn't hold up under scrutiny.

NFTs aren't scarce. Anyone can make them for anything. I can sell you the couch I'm sitting on as an NFT.

If I own a Picasso, I could burn it, have my tigers urinate on it, or make sure no other human ever sees it again. I can do whatever I want. What exactly can I do with Jack Dorsey's first tweet? Get him to delete it? Change it into an ad?

There's no legal framework behind NFTs. Ownership is meaningless. If you bought my couch as an NFT, good luck coming to get it.

Also, when the cryptography behind NFTs is broken (and it will be!), what happens to the ownership? If the chain switches algorithms, not everyone will update their keys. After breaking the old scheme, ownership will instantly be impossible to prove.

I really don't understand your point. I can print trading cards for my cat. You can make NFTs for your couch. No one wants to buy either. But if the MLB or John Cleese are selling, the equation changes.

We're in the "determined moms are buying all the Beanie Babies in stock" phase.

Next you have the copycats, people selling shovels, and uber drivers investing in it.

Then comes the eternal stagnation.

These are worth jack shit except to the temporary evangelicals buying the craze. They aren't rare, you have to explain it ("I wonder if anyone knows I own the NFT of this song"), and the crypto will be broken before the holders update their wallets to safer algorithms.

Nobody will ever honor your CryptoKitties. You can't use them in Nintendogs or Neopets. The creators won't build a compelling platform for them and they'll simply die from waning interest.

These are moon certificates, except with crypto.

Okay, but moon certificates seem even MORE equivalent to baseball cards. I don't think you understand my objection, I completely agree that NFTS are inherently worthless: I just don't think that's an exceedingly unique property. They're baseball cards or beanie babies with a smaller storage footprint.

The fact that you have insisted (twice!) that the secp256k1 curve will be broken makes it impossible to take anything you have to say on this subject seriously.

Longbets 20 years $5000?

I expect quantum to pick up major steam, especially if major state actors want to screw over the Bitcoin network.

Minor note, NFTs are on Ethereum and not Bitcoin. Ethereum is already quantum resistant and has slot in solutions to make it quantum secure when needed (they aren't in use right now as they are less efficient). Quantum computing is not an existential threat to NFTs or blockchains.

Charmin

https://rarible.com/charmin