zlacker

>>nemoni+(OP)
It's astonishing to me that people will just buy into any success story that involves crypto and NFTs. People don't question why poorly drawn pictures are being bought for thousands of dollars, don't question why there are hundreds of altcoins on the market and some "cryptocurrency experts" are supposedly "offering free tips" on investment. The whole space is rife with scams and embellishments and yet there are so many people just blindly buying into it, including the damn BBC!

>>WilTim+o2
While I generally agree with your sentiment, some of the most iconic art in the world seems to me to be poorly made and I have no idea why they are valued or admired. I don’t just mean the usual go-to controversial examples in modern art like Serrano’s “Piss Christ”[0] or Emin’s “My Bed”[1], as even some older stuff like Klimt’s “Der Kuss”[2] give me this confusion (the woman has always looked to me like she has a broken neck).

(If it was just “I don’t like it” I would also list Cubism, but I can get that there are well-made examples of Cubism without liking the style).

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Bed

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kiss_(Klimt)

>>ben_w+X6
>> It's astonishing to me that people will just buy into any success story that involves crypto and NFTs. People don't question why poorly drawn pictures are being bought for thousands of dollars

> While I generally agree with your sentiment, some of the most iconic art in the world seems to me to be poorly made and I have no idea why they are valued or admired. I don’t just mean modern art like Serrano’s “Piss Christ”[0] or Emin’s “My Bed”[1], but even some older stuff like Klimt’s “Der Kuss”[2] (the woman has always looked to me like she has a broken neck).

I don't think "Serrano’s “Piss Christ”[0] or Emin’s “My Bed”[1]" are in the category "most iconic art in the world." IIRC, most iconic art is such because of it's place in art history, and sometimes what looks poorly made actually required quite a lot of skill (e.g. if you try to flick paint on a canvas like Jackson Pollock did, it won't turn out). Sometimes skill requires skill to appreciate. Can someone who can't code appreciate the difference between good code that works and some spaghetti codes that also works?

I think the issue with NFT "poorly drawn pictures" is there's nothing special about them: not innovative, not influential, not especially pleasing, not made by anyone with any reputation (for art). Just common stuff that doesn't stand out from the crowd. Like a sibling comment said about modern art, NFTs are "an investment vehicle with a veneer of cultural education," without the veneer (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30285259).