What really gets me about the "95% of NFTs are now worthless" reveal is, each and every one of those piece of shit ape drawings required a nontrivial energy consumption to generate initial, theoretical value. Most of this energy ultimately came from fossil fuel and coal.
Collectively, they basically took a huge bite out of global measures to minimise our environmental impact — to generate worthlessness.
Late stage capitalism, ladies and gentlefolk.
[Edited because my spellcheck is also worthless]
And before you come at me about how eco-friendly Ethereum claim to be: not at the time they weren't, and their relative carbon reduction will only greenwash any increase of usage that will inevitably grow to the same carbon levels.
@haverholm any tech falls into this category, tbh. How many pages of content written decades ago on inferior hardware propagated the early days of the internet resulted in far more inefficiencies, using far more energy either to store or transmit around the world had a similar impact.
But you must have these failures to find the gems that move the needle forward for humanity. You can’t always see around which corner will hold the keys to unlocking potential.
NFT and crypto are a sort of pyramidal scheme with a gigantic carbon footprint. Your argument is like comparing a pebble to Mount Everest. Moreover, even ignoring environmental issues, NFTs are indistinguishable of a massive scam, so they are despicable any way you take it. There is no way NFTs can move us forward; they are a form of parasitism, and nothing else. The sooner they die, the better.
