nowt to do with B

Maybe we need a new For Sale section where instead of selling actual artworks people sell NFT fragments of their collection 

You get money, but you keep the work

@artscapy thank me later

What an absolute cluster fuck of wankery

That seems to be a contradiction.
I think I doubt a lot lately though, but I'm not sure.....

Matt Levine writes a daily piece for Bloomberg, usually pointing out some of the crazy things happening in the Finacial world (Tesla, Meme stocks...stuff like that).

Yesterday he wrote about NFTs, and with reference to Banksy



NFT Stuff
“How can a physical artwork become an NFT,” asks Felix Salmon at Axios, but of course Money Stuff readers know the answer. “By lighting it on fire,” is the answer. We call this the “object-fire-token-money” cycle of non-fungible tokens, and it is the absolutely standard approach. Crypto mascot Brock Pierce explained NFTs to a guy by lighting the guy’s painting on fire. Some comic-book artist apparently burns an original painting every month to make NFTs. Some DeFi platform burned a Banksy painting to make an NFT; later the guy behind it gave an interview under the pseudonym “Burnt Banksy.” You buy the work of art, you light it on fire, and then you sell an NFT representing the now-incinerated work of art.
You might object that this is very stupid. I will not argue with you. In particular, if you are the person doing this process, you might ask, well, why do I have to burn up the work of art? What if I bought a painting, sold NFTs representing whatever-an-NFT-represents of the painting, and then also hung the painting on my wall? Who could object? The people buying the NFTs would still have the NFTs, which are digital tokens representing … nothing; they would own just as much nothing whether or not I actually burn up the painting. This way, I get the money from selling the NFTs, plus I get to keep the painting.
Salmon goes on:
The art market globally sees volume of about $60 billion per year, almost all of which is trade in physical objects. Art-world insiders including former Christie's co-chair Loïc Gouzer are on the lookout for ways to monetize physical paintings without necessarily giving up physical ownership of them.
There are some traditional ways to monetize a thing without giving up ownership of the thing. Borrowing against it is popular, for instance, but then you have to pay back the money. I think that you should read “monetize” here to mean “sell.” Art-world insiders are on the lookout for ways to sell paintings without necessarily giving up physical ownership of them. Well, of course they are, aren’t they? If you could sell a painting and also keep it, you would have both the money and the painting. That seems strictly better than having only the money or only the painting.
Salmon continues:
Gouzer said he spent $12.9 million at Sotheby's in May to buy a Banksy painting estimated at $3 million to $5 million. He's now showing the work at Art Basel Miami Beach under the aegis of Particle, a company that intends to turn the work into 10,000 NFTs "within the overarching structure of collective ownership.”
I think you should read “within the overarching structure of collective ownership” to mean “with absolutely no collective ownership whatsoever”:
The NFT owners will not have significant collective ownership of the physical painting. That would require Particle to register as a securities issuer. ...
As Particle managing director Harold Eytan told Axios, "NFTs are changing the way that people perceive ownership." Value drivers in the NFT world aren't based in contract law, they're based in community and consensus. So long as enough people believe that they're going to own a piece of a Banksy, they can trade on that belief.
Sure, right, yes, if someone thinks that you’re selling them something valuable, they will give you money for it. And if you aren’t in fact selling them something valuable then … well the point is to get them to give you the money.
So who will get the painting?
Particle claims that it "has chosen to legally destroy" the work by donating it to a non-profit called the Particle Foundation, which pledged never to sell the work. There is no legal destruction, however.
Yes! Yes! Yes! “I will buy a painting, and then I will turn it into an NFT by lighting it on fire, and then I will sell you the NFT, except that when I said ‘lighting it on fire’ I actually meant ‘hanging it on my living room wall.’” Not that lighting it on fire made any more sense! Still!
I love this so, so much; I cannot stress enough how much I love it. Some rich guy will buy a multimillion-dollar painting and then you can just buy shares of The Fact That A Rich Guy Has A Painting. Do you have the painting? No, he does. But you have the NFT. Come on.
I am kidding a little bit — the foundation “will exhibit works,” sure, and I suppose the guy is not literally going to hang it on his wall. “Museums could do something similar with their permanent collections, says Gouzer,” the idea I suppose being that instead of asking for donations museums could, like, auction off tradable donation receipts? But I am not kidding much. We talked in September about a Bohemian prince who was auctioning off NFTs to restore his family’s various castles. He keeps the castles, but if you buy an NFT, you get to pay for the upkeep of the castles and the restoration of the art on the walls. That’s a great deal, for him. Why shouldn’t art-world insiders get to sell their art and also keep it?

Stop posting affiliate links to something that clearly isn’t anythjng to do with Banksy

There will never be an issue with copyright again if he choose this path...just saying

To me this tech is a way the artist can claw back their orginal stamp and get gifted directly for the work they do and create ...but cutting out the middleman /pimp

www.particlecollection.com/?r=okDyj

Unofficial, but I’m hoping this at least forces a response from him.

Obviously not Banksy as this has to be the most dumb idea ever to turn this particular piece into an NFT of 10,000 white and black squares. So mindlessly dumb and a huge money drain. Anyone investing in this NFT deserves to lose their money. Clown style.