There are a lot of fools in this market that don't understand the tech or its specific guarantees and non-guarantees, sure, but that doesn't mean NFTs aren't bringing anything new at all to the table.
You can't say that NFTs are a trustless system when the origin of the NFT requires trust. You might as well assume the "+ C" term in all integrals equals zero. It's just factually incorrect.
No, as long as it's known that the address that created the NFT is owned by whichever public figure created the artwork, you're good to go.
> You can't say that NFTs are a trustless system when the origin of the NFT requires trust.
That's like saying PGP is not a trustless encryption scheme because you still have to trust that the person you're exchanging encrypted information with is who they say they are. Nobody (who is informed anyway) has made any sort of claim about PGP fixing that problem. It is entirely irrelevant to the value-add.
Now, whether you believe the value-add actually matters given the caveats is another topic of discussion, of course.
Nobody--who is informed--has given me any coherent description of what value add NFTs provide, period. These ever shifting sands of never-enumerated benefits.
What, exactly, did you mean when you said "the value-add of NFTs... is namely that there's a trustless, verifiable record of transfer"? You responded to my assertion that NFT ownership is not trustless by saying that wasn't the value-add, the value-add was that they were trustless.
It means you're criticizing something for the wrong reason. Criticizing PGP for not doing something it ever claimed to do is akin to criticizing NFTs for not doing something it ever claimed to do.
> Nobody--who is informed--has given me any coherent description of what value add NFTs provide, period.
Since I assume you're intelligent enough to understand, I can only assume that means you don't want to understand.
> What, exactly, did you mean when you said "the value-add of NFTs... is namely that there's a trustless, verifiable record of transfer"?
Meaning that so long as you can verify that the NFT was minted by who you think it was minted by, you don't have to trust any of the intermediaries that it passed through. It's like buying something that comes with a physical certificate of authenticity. In real life, you have to trust that the certificate itself was not forged by any of the people in the supply chain before it got to you. That's the part that an NFT solves.
The trust issues that an NFT does not solve (that also exists in real life):
1. Some rando Bob prints out their own certificate of authenticity and calls it "Bob's Certificate of Authenticity that This Painting is a Picasso." It's up to you to verify that Bob is someone whose opinion is worth respecting and trusting.
2. The physical product (if there is one) that the certificate of authenticity comes with is in fact the same physical product it originally came with. Not so much a problem with digital goods.
> You responded to my assertion that NFT ownership is not trustless by saying that wasn't the value-add, the value-add was that they were trustless.
Yes, because there are obviously multiple dimensions to the concept of trust, and for some reason you're conflating all of them.
I mean, it's really not a hard concept to wrap your mind around. Unless, of course, you'd prefer to keep looking down on NFTs as a form of status signaling, in which case do keep on pretending not to understand.
The NFT is also not the work in question. While there are some proof of concept works that have their binary data stored directly in the blockchain, the vast majority are just URLs to some other site, URLs that could die or change at any time. And there is no recourse within the blockchain itself to adjudicate the breach of trust that would represent. Which means, again, we have to fall back on the traditional system of legal contracts and courts to resolve disputes.
In other words, the decentralized, "zero-trust" nature of NFTs completely undermines any concept of ownership that isn't a post-hoc rationalization designed to part fools from dollars.