>>5901098block chains in general are a good idea, as is the basic concept being NFTs, the implementation is just dog shit retarded.
Having a receipt for digital art isn't necessarily a bad thing, though 'rights' for it shouldn't be retarded expensive.
If I do a commission for someone and they NFT it or whatever as proof of the transaction and proof that they "own" the original as some form of receipt, there's nothing inherently wrong with that. Essentially its a certificate you can put with something when selling it, e.g. you paid <famous artist> to do a drawing for your webpage. So if you sell your product to someone else, you have a certification that this famous artist drew a picture for the website, similar to how you'd get certifications for real life art products that certify X did Y.
