Unlike now, where no one makes a living building anything digitally.

Sorry if your post was sarcasm, NFTs have hit some kind of milestone where I can't tell the difference between the jokes and sincere posts.

Because no one has ever made a living designing graphics before NFTs?

Which is exactly the argument big studios used to argue for DRM. NFT is (quite literally) DRM, rebranded and ostensibly accessible to the masses, but with all the caveats amplified accordingly and with a huge energy cost attached.

A high energy cost is not fundemental to NFTs.

People don't have to pay for VR avatars when playing VRChat.

Forced monetization of all that, is a bad thing, not a good thing.

NFTs let you own a link to a digital asset... which isn't very useful for an infinitely reproducible asset. With a central entity (eg Meta) there's no need for distributed ownership.

NFTs let you own autographs of digital assets.

Which is cool. If it weren't for the energy use.

For some definition of "own" which is unclear to me why it's desirable.