Now, how do we get to digital fashion from here? Overconsumption, sustainability, Covid-19, social distancing and the drive towards digital platforms, the pollution of the fashion sector… you see where this is going.
But seen from another perspective (Christie’s auction docet), it just looks like the most lame game for the bored rich. Videogames for instance: buying a bespoke fishing rod in Legend of Zelda nobody else has except you? And of course huge potential to actually support artists in digital media. There are fields in which NFTs certainly make sense. There are immense doses of naivety and ignorance surrounding the NFT argument, with people spending insane amounts of money on the stupidest purchases. When I own a digital item, let’s say a video, and someone else hacks it online, what’s the difference between what he owns and what I own? “The First 5000 Days” sold at $69 million by Christie’s. But if I buy the original of a Picasso painting I own the original, anyone else either comes to my house or stares at a copy. Everyone noticed when Christie’s sold an NFT by digital artist Beeple for $69 million. This opened an entire new market place that insiders believe is exploding (a bubble? only time will tell). It is a unique certificate, so if you own one, you’re the only owner of that digital “item”. But if a bitcoin is fungible (sharable, replaceable), an NFT – still guaranteed by a blockchain, just as cryptocurrencies – is not. The definition for NFTs is already cryptic, as “fungible” isn’t the ordinary word you’d use in your everyday conversation. We might as well start from here to introduce an argument culturally and ethically so complex as digital fashion.
0 kommentar(er)
