Lurker > ChaosTonyV4

Cute!

Kudos for giving a home to the one that other potential owners would have rejected. I'm sure you're going to give him a fantastic life!

I don't have a phone.

They have nothing to worry about from the FTC.

Even with this acquisition it only makes them the third biggest in the industry behind Sony and Tencent. It's literally nothing to worry about at the end of the day.

Nothing worse than Xbox fanboys on social media right now.

Is there any connectivity between the titles? Like save file bonuses that are carried over from game to game?

Because I have 1 and 2 on Steam, but hell yeah I'll grab the third on Epic to save money.

Joe Mama

Scolipede is almost my favorite Pokemon. Easy top 10, maybe top 5.

The same can be said about all the items I mentioned.

It has nothing to do with the scarcity of the item and everything to do with the perceived value.

I mean we see this all the time in the physical world.

Paintings, jewels, coins, baseball cards, video games etc...

Nope

The only problem of mine it would address is letting me put off my job search past graduation (which if anything might be bad because then I'd need to explain an employment gap)

Perhaps helping logan paul is not the right tact, but it would help *anyone* not get scammed out of millions.

Ignore oil paintings, there are other collectibles, like pokemon cards or baseball cards that *can* be replicated with the right materials and type of printer in a way that would be virtually impossible to detect. And yet knowing something isn't legitimate makes it worthless.

.

This is a good way to put it as well.

And i'm definitely not saying everyone *has* to deal in NFTs.
Nor am I saying they are innately better than their physical counterparts.

But I think there is room enough for both to exist and there is at least a purpose to them existing.

Yeah, that's why I singled out PFP projects as the worst type of NFT. The randomly generated projects, with a few notable exceptions, are an oversaturated speculative bubble.

But there are many small time artists who went from struggling to get by to being able to survive on the money they've earned selling their own personal art as NFTs. They don't have to be the person who makes millions overnight, but making thousands can be enough to live on and for many digital artists who were being forced to accept laughably small sums for their work, it's a big step forward. Being able to actually sell the ownership of your digital artwork gives you more control.

This is the contract address for cryptopunks:

https://etherscan.io/address/0xb47e3cd837ddf8e4c57f05d70ab865de6e193bbb

All legitimate crypto punks were created using this contract and are inexorably linked to that contract. Full stop.

You could right click -> save as a cryptopunk and have a jpeg that looks the same, but you would not be the owner, because the blockchain would not say you were the owner.

You could that jpeg and mint an NFT using out of it, but it would not be on the correct contract so it would not be legitimate. It would just be some other non crypto punk NFT that used the same image.

Edit: And I don't know all the particulars of the banksy situation, but it sounds like banksy has not made any NFTs of his artwork, so bidding on one that is supposedly from him would be pretty suspicious.

For the same reason that people care about originals more than a counterfeit.