this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2026
895 points (99.1% liked)

Funny

14094 readers
1533 users here now

General rules:

Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Khanzarate@lemmy.world 21 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

For Logan Paul, yes, he wanted it to go up.

But if this painting was laundering at work, the important part is that the seller can point to this transaction as "real". The IRS or the FBI might be looking into his sudden gains of half a million dollars, but when they do, they find that he sold Logan Paul half a million dollars of art.

The NFT part makes it incredibly easy to generate said art. Before NFTs, rich people would mark up paintings, and those had to go up in value, because they would buy them at 100,000$ and sell them for 200,000$, so the government would see 100,000$ of profit, but the next guy with the painting, he'd have to sell it for 300,000, claiming 100,000$ in profit, and the next guy, 400,000$, you get the idea.

NFTs can lose value in a way real art isnt allowed to because anyone can claim that's the price, and after the sale, they can be discarded as trash, essentially. New ones can be made in bulk for no effort, and its alright to sell 1000 NFTs at 100$ each, because you can just keep making them and "selling" them and no one has to care about their value in the same way because they're mass producible without that crashing the market.

[–] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 6 points 14 hours ago

Thank you for that thoughtful response. That all makes sense.

[–] Steve@startrek.website 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Real art can simply be destroyed if you want

[–] Khanzarate@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago

You can also just never sell it, but buying it doesn't help you launder your own ill-gotten money, just other people's. The issue is creating it. It's not that big an issue, but NFTs are way more efficient.