It is difficult for the average person to conceive of how useless NFTs are
Random thought dump of observations from someone who&#x27;s dabbled in the space a bit (but is not a cryptobro by any means) -<p>Here&#x27;s a thing about NFTs that I&#x27;ve seen a lot crypto evangelists and haters miss, and a sentiment that I think will grow once the novelty dies out: The &quot;art&quot; is irrelevant. It&#x27;s no more than a thumbnail or a poster marketing it&#x27;s utility, and that&#x27;s exactly the actual important part - what I can <i>do</i> with it. Can I use it as an in-game item? Do I get access to your next podcast episode early in a patreon-like service? Do I unlock your next online course for free or get a 50% discount on your next concert?<p>This sense of multiple applications is what I think people may or may not mean when they use the term &quot;creator economy&quot;, but I think it fits nicely. People argue that interoperability of assets is useless because &quot;no two games would ever want to share an item, developers don&#x27;t want that&quot;. But another angle to this is that creators can give utility to a single asset across a wide variety of applications for their fans.<p>Regardless, none of this has been realised yet and maybe this is just a pipe dream if the majority of hype in the space continues to revolve around useless, ugly ass monkeys that are shown off on twitter for some ego-inflating sense of elitism. It could go either way I guess