seth sisters we won... our ape has come home
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
seth sisters we won... our ape has come home
seth sisters we won... our ape has come home
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
How exactly does he own a Jpeg?
It's a JPEG converted to an NFT so it can't be copied by anyone except those who know how to take screenshots.
His account "owns" the receipt showing where the jpeg is hosted.
Inside the jpg is an ebomb that explodes when it detects it has been downloaded to a computer that isn't Seth's
Two words for you: Block and Chain. It's blockchained in cyberspace with my Dogecoin
>How exactly does he own a Jpeg?
I know this is a meme, but I like to use this to talk about what NFTs are.
I am not an NFT bro. Hate them actually. Yet I find the whole scene a fascinating series of trainwrecks.
NFTs make me think of the trading card craze or limited numbered collector figures. Makes sense that Green got into NFTs since he was already into collector action figures. I've been into the same action figure collector scene. Holy shit is it full of idiots paying waaaay too much for artificially scarce collectibles. I can see how some of those nerds could get into NFTs.
Instead of having a certificate of authenticity to authenticate against bootlegs, they use blockchain cryptography to prove that "JPEG" is authentic.
At least with Funkopops you acquire a piece of plastic garbage you can use to pollute the oceans. With NFTs the guy who first issued it can always pull the plug on his server and then you're left with nothing but a dead hyperlink.
He doesn't, he "owns" the hyperlink to the jpeg.
The equivalent of you knowing some address on Google Maps and then declaring that you own the building.
No it isn't, because someone else owns the deed and property to it, just like if you were to claim you owned the IP rights to Spongebob because you downloaded a jpeg of the official art; you don't
But owning an NFT means that you do in fact own its property rights
>But owning an NFT means that you do in fact own its property rights
According to what?
the ledger, usually ethereum. you have the right to sell the token, anyone is free to download the image.
So a txt file says you own the jpg.
an immutable ledger allows the owner, and only the owner, to sell it to the next man, ideally at a profit
Why was this ~~*immutable ledger*~~ unable to prevent Green's jpg from getting stolen in the first place?
because he's a fricking moron that gave his password away
That won't stop be me from using these monkeys for profit. Who is gonna sue me? NFTs dont hold up in court.
Do you feel like this is profound? Of course you can take screenshots anon, most of this shit is CCO to begin with
I literally never said take screenshot. I said USE IT FOR PROFIT YOU MONKEY Black person.
what is Eminem gonna do if I put the Eminape in a for profit youtube video? Nothing. Doesnt hold up in court.
NFT holders claim it is as valid as owning the IP to the image but if you can't sue someone for copyright and have it hold up in court, it just isnt
He likely has the money to attempt legal shit, and lawyers are expensive.
I know he has the money to attempt lawsuit. He is Eminem. Literal billionaire at this point.
That doesnt mean it will hold up in court. The moment it gets to court the judge will roll his eyes and throw it out and he will have wasted thousands of dollars
>Literal billionaire at this point.
>Eminem
I think you don't know how much a billion actually is.
He has six platinum albums, owns a very popular XM radio station (shade45), a record label (shady records) that has four artists who've also sold platinum signed to it (he gets a cut of their record sales as the label owner), and now he owns a restaurant (called Mom's Spaghetti)
Eminem does a lot. He has a lot of money. Literally lives in the K Mart mansion. I would be surprised if he WERENT close to a billion dollars in net worth if he isnt already
It's 230 million, so no.
thats almost 1/4th of the way there. not bad. still $230M than I have right now, so not bad
right, but a billion dollars is an insane amount of money to gain and requires you to make sacrifices/decisions that only a true sociopath can follow through with. I don't think Em wants to do that ever and already has more money than he ever needs.
How much do you think it would cost to convince him to let me sleep with Hailey
he would break your kneecaps and rig a bomb up in your car's engine just for asking
Anon Eminem spent the majority of his fame high out of his mind on pills. He should be a billionaire but he pissed away a lot of really good years.
Sure, but he was still pissing green left and right even from rehab from residual record sales and that time he bootlegged his own tape in 2007 for publicity right before his overdose. Not to mention owning Shady Records and just making passive income off his signees.
You say that, but there is likely a clause that says he has distribution rights of that specific character and thinking a good lawyer wouldn't convince a judge to go through with the proceedings is pretty arrogant and stupid, which is your second most stupid idea of all time.
Your first being making a rip-off of a shitty NFT cartoon.
>but there is likely a clause that says he has distribution rights of that specific character
Enforced by who or what? On what basis??
The world of Crypto and NFTs are a wild west with only the barest framework of what I would laughingly call "Rules".
I'm just saying arm-chair lawyers should not be sizing up to actual lawyers and thinking they have a chance.
It doesnt matter if there is a clause and a good lawyer. Any judge that didnt go to clown college wouldnt let their good name be dragged through the mud defending a picture of an ape. Shit like this happens all the time, even to celebrities.
i don't think many of them claim that
Yeah and that holds up in which court?
what? you just sell the shit via smartcontract. people are dumping these shits OTC except in very rare cases. couldn't be further from being an issue
my home's deed is just a piece of paper and a record in fed computer but if someone tries to frick with it I can take legal procedures to unfrick it. what can you do with your nft deed when you see someone posting "your" image.
literally nothing, you don't actually own the image; this is understood by anyone. what the other person can't do is sell the digital token which provably owned by a given EOA
well good on them owning the digital token. this shit is stupid.
I know where you are coming from anon. As a punter in the decentalized derivatives space, seeing people get rich off this shit made me seethe. I repeated many of the arguments posted in this thread. But eventually i had an epiphany and 'got' it, learned how to the play the game and now i genuinely enjoy the time i spent messing with them, money aside. Where this road leads is cryptographically proving the bullshit claims on the internet. In the future when anon is talking shit to you you just sign a message from your wallet hodling your PHD from harvard nft.
that's a nice pitch but meaningless. i don't care about your harvard nft but what you write. can't tokenize being moronic.
>you don't actually own the image; this is understood by anyone. what the other person can't do is sell the digital token which provably owned by a given EOA
Yes but other people will sell shirts of the IMAGE, not the digital token.
I'm already on the phone with a meme factory in China. We're about to start producing Board Monkey products and begin shipping them out all over the internet within the next few...seconds.
you're like a year late
I'm sure it's just easier to draw your own bored monkeys as you already own that copywrite.
>you just made that up so you own it!
Imagine being this autistic.
doesn't even have to be monkeys. You can literally just make a cartoon of your own without the hoops of crypto bullshit, as this shit existed before them.
Chinese factories produce knockoffs of copyrighted material. The names are usually slightly changed because of quality control and/or humorously low-skilled copyright evasion. In short, it's a joke autist.
I know it was a joke, I was just making conversation after ignoring it.
>ignoring social cues
Like I said: autist.
Yeah I guess so. It also wasn't really funny enough to really comment on/extend. I don't mean to sandbag you like that but I don't invest mental energy in bad bits.
>i-it wasn't funny to me!
Don't care autist. Other minds exist and you also spent the energy replying to the posts. Cope.
If people are ignoring your jokes, they are politely trying to tell you to stop.
I don't count my (You)s, homosexual. Go back. We're strangers on the internet.
never said you did, you're just being butthurt now.
nta but you should go back
I've been here since 2006, so no I'm fine being rent free in your head now.
>misses nta
Who's rent-free? kek
me, because I own my house.
Holy shit. Just go back.
>projecting meaning into the void
>imagining control over a complete stranger's emotions
Work on that theory of other minds, anon. You'll get there one day.
You don't own "property rights", you own a receipt.
The receipt on the blockchain is what you own, no one can (legally) use that receipt of claim. They can do frick whatever with the image, print it on shirts, but By Gawd you own that high-dollar receipt floating on the blockchain.
Basic IP and commercial licensing contracts? This information is readily available.
You do have property and licensing rights
>You do have property and licensing rights
Enforced by WHO?
People who buy crypto supposedly have rights not to be cheated, but the SEC broadly laughs at most of their grievances.
So?
BAYC NFTs all have IP and commercial rights tied to them, that's the law, pursuing legal action is subject to an owner
>So?
>BAYC NFTs all have IP and commercial rights tied to them, that's the law, pursuing legal action is subject to an owner
Here's the difference. If you buy an Actual Investment Instrument with your monies, the person selling it is licensed, is scrutinized by the SEC and the banks and all the other enforcement agencies, and if he cheats you he will be in a lot of trouble. If your legit investment just goes sour, you lose money, them's the breaks. But the guy can't just vanish with your money into the aether.
In NFTs, people can do this, or they can just just steal your password, and what is your ability to seek justice? Seth Green is a multi millionaire, and he had to BUY IT AGAIN FROM A DUDE WHO BOUGHT HIS HOT (as in stolen) MONKEY. The Law just laughs in your face.
It's still the law
I think your issue may be that you're arguing with something that isn't being presented
>It's still the law
A law that is not enforced by Law Enforcement Agencies, is not monitored or scrutinized by them, is effectively just the word "law".
Because through the blockchain, the NFT belonged to the person who phished it from him. Until legal action was pursued, which could take months and net nothing, he simply bought it back for a higher price.
then why did he pay a ransom for it
He didn't. The guy who stole it resold it to a third guy, and in the world of "NFT Law" his means of seeking justice was to buy it a second time from that third guy.
there are microscopic israelites in the code.
Turns out that at the subatomic level, we are all Teh israelites.
pretty easy actually. Just right click and save as.
Block chain is really quite simple and yet it is conceptually out of reach for so many morons.
No, we get it, he owns the receipt for that jpeg. It's still fricking moronic.
>yeah I know exactly how I got scammed, I'm so smart
scams exist around all speculative markets, anon. Wait until you learn about the stock market.
You don understand that by simply buying and owning an NFT you're not being scammed? The valuation is appended to it which is tied to cryto. You sell to whoever who will pay for it, that may be no one at all, or someone.
Nobody, absolutely nobody, buys an NFT with the intention to be its final owner. If you buy an NFT with the perfectly self-aware intent to sell it to another sucker, then maybe you're not getting scammed, exactly, but you are still participating in a scam regardless. Though in all likelihood, you ARE indeed getting scammed, e.g. if you fell for one of the many rug pulls.
The entire purpose of a venture in asset ownership is acknowledging that value of an asset can depreciate or not. While there isn't much purpose to an NFT in and of itself outside of ownership, no, it isn't a scam to just buy one, even if you find that you can't sell it to someone else for more.
The eternal question. Think about an NFT as owning 'the original'.
In real life terms it's kind of like owning an original Miró even though you know there are Miró copies out there.
NFTs are a fricking scam.
I'm gonna explain this to morons once, maybe they'll get it
Think of a blockchain as a ledger (e.g. Ethereum)
now imagine anyone can create subledgers within this main ledger
now I'll create a subledger X, this will keep a record of my painting's owners
I create a digital asset and want to sell it, I can register this on my subledger
{
assetHash,
signedAssetHash (optional)
linkToPreview (optional, can even be modifiable by the current owner)
currentOwnerAddress (this owner can transfer ownership)
}
I can simply "sell" my digital asset to someone
by registering it on my subledger and then transfering the ownership to them. This can serve is proof of sale/ownership. Whether someone else can save it or not is irrelevant, this is only serving as proof of ownership of the digital asset
In the current scam market, this proof of ownership is usually useless unless you want to use the asset in a commercial venture and require copyrights to it
to continue:
NFT's only use isn't jpg/images. I specifically said a digital asset, this can be anything (potentially something worth having ownership over)
for example sorare is using it properly. They are creating digital player cards as NFTs that you can use on their platform
owning these cards is useful since you can use them, to play the game. Same can be used for any other game's assets. Any owner can also easily transfer their rights to someone else
very safe investment yes
daily reminder that little red menace got shoehorned into Hollywood by his "uncle", a "talent agent" and thanks to this blatant nepotism, double digit IQ garbage such as robot chicken was allowed to fester and ruinate cartoon network
How do you steal an nft?
Screenshotting it
The moron unknowingly, legally, gave it away.
QRD?
it wasn't a legal transfer, it was phished
One common method is to prepare a malicious NFT that contains code instead of on URL leading to a jpeg. You then send this NFT to your target's NFT wallet. If your target clicks on your trojan NFT to find out what it is, the code gets executed and sends all contents of your target's wallet to another wallet of your chosing. This transaction will register as completely legitimate on the blockchain, thus making you the rightful owner of the NFTs transferred to your wallet.
in Seth Green's case, he clicked a link in a phishing email.
sshhh don't tell Seth, take this.
thanks for the free 300k
Bro, how did you get passed the security? I keep getting the distorted image.
Here have 1.2 millions for your 4 apes
Frick, this one is even worse.
Frick bros, I got my hands on the original and it has a self-destruct failsafe built into it! Shit's on fire!!
Frick! It ended up bleaching and putting my fricking name on it! What am I going to do, bros! It's only a matter of time until the cyberpolice send me an email!
Lol classic McCormick
wow, your rich!!
wtf 300k was just deposited to my account!! thanks anon!
jfc
nfts are moronic, but this is a reddit "joke"
It's still funnier than you.
Are there people offering to sell this to seth under every one of his tweets? If not there should be
IM RICH. Thanks anon!
i dont get it. no one told him that the NFT bubble burst?
this reads like false flag PR firm nonsense to get seth "talentless moron" green back in the spotlight
does he have some project coming up or something?
You’re prob correct
Yes. It's a cartoon starring that exact stolen monkey. Seriously.
whats it called thats low even for him
White Horse Tavern according to Google.
JESUS FRICKING CHRIST
i hate him, i viscerally hate him
Seth saw Bojack Horseman and wanted to make it worse.
Must have broken the world record for amount of soi in one video.
Does the qt bartender frick the monkey?
Man, to think all of this happened because Colin Quinn didn't take the role in Austin Powers
sneed
>normal words but NFT guy!
heh
Jesus
This encapsulates everything wrong with entertainment in 2022.
lmfao
Jesus
Its like a lower effort terrible warren the ape. Which was basically proto Bojack but funny
Why did it even need to be about the NFT monkey? Why not make an original character?
>bought back stolen nft to regain rights for use in his new show
>definitely not just bs PR scam he deffo paid 300k what an idiot right goy?!
>*Screenshots your NFT*
Thanks bro!
Imagine having $300k
>What is Seth Green's Net Worth and Salary? Seth Green is an American actor, voice artist, director, writer, and producer who has a net worth of $40 million.
Net Worth: $40 Million
Date of Birth: Feb 8, 1974 (48 years old)
Height: 5 ft 4 in (1.63 m)
apparently family guy residuals add up
meanwhile the simpsons voice actors are billionaires
Net worth isn't cash on hand.
Isn't the whole "upside" to NFTs the idea that they can't be stolen because they're colorful receipts? How unfathomabley dumb must you be to lose one. Not to mention investing in the first place lol.
he literally got his wallet pished, lmao
The weird part is he has $300k to blow on something like this.
I still don’t understand this shit.
Gonna be funny when they steal it back.
Can't they just edit the blockchain to give him his access back? It's all digital.
It was sold by the thief to an Australian doctor who became the new owner and he didn’t want to give it up
why does this bored ape thing remind me of adult swim?
Stoopid Monkey
he could've spent far less to both get better art commissioned by a professional character artist and have it minted as an nft but sunk cost affects millionaires i guess
Presumably the idea is that the Bored Apes come prepackaged with brand name recognition which Seth wants to tap in on. Keep in mind that the show he's building around the ape is horrendously low effort horseshit. It only exists to make that one particular ape in his possession famous and thus "valuable," so that he can sell it off for a profit afterwards. Hiring an artist to come up with an original design would defeat the point of riding on the pre-existing BAYC hype and reputation.
Jesus fricking christ what an absolute homosexual.
its just another form of "art" money laundering
many such cases
But he just spent $300k on it???
god thats awful
he needs an nft from that bunny puppet show
what the frick is a bored ape and why does he own a yacht club?
Looks like he's up shit creek without a paddle
I literally still don't get what the FRICK is NFT. It's a jpeg? You pay money for a jpeg?
Worse. It's a receipt for a jpeg that says you own the receipt.
even better: you basically pay for the link to the jpeg
So why do they post the jpeg for everyone to save it? Are they fricking stupid? Why don't they at least keep it to themselves?
>Are they fricking stupid?
They're spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on a jpeg, you tell me
What makes you think anyone cares about the jpeg of a fugly monkey? They only care about selling the receipt to some other dupe for more money than they bought it for.
It's technically just a digital receipt saying you are the owner of a jpeg
It's insanely moronic and I have a hard time believing people use it for anything more than money laundering
dont mind rightdroids,they buy everything as long one grifter says it btfos libtards
seethe rightdroid
>It is actually hilarious how may "leftoids" are into NFTs too
yeah so many like seth green and.... um yeah
MATT
DAMON
It is actually hilarious how may "leftoids" are into NFTs too. All these Hollywood liberals like Green always talk about saving the planet and going green (pun intended), yet a ton of them hopped right into the NFT and Crypto racket.
There are grifters and morons on both sides of the aisle.
They're basically digital trading cards. You get a token that says you own #308 out of 1000 of a particular 'card' (note: you usually don't own the card itself, not the rights, not even a jpg or png or whatever) and then you can trade that token to someone else who will then become the owner of #308.
It's a tokenized picture in a collection of randomised pictures. Marketing, hype, demand and project utility development bring value
>project utility
It's always funny when Cryptoheads use terms like this.
There's no utility to crypto, it's digitally moving money around, something that happens to trillions in normal currency EVERY SINGLE DAY, at 1000x the use of energy.
its even funnier that some will say they do it so banks can't touch their money, but guess what, coinbase is a bank lol
if you can't understand the possible benefits of a transparent, public, non-profit ledger then I don't know what to tell you except to make sure you tip your bank's CEO and ask politely for him to over leverage using your money
well my bank will accept government issued money and allo me to leverage mortgages based on government based records. most of all that is also public. i don't see how non-govermental entites and made up monies will make my life easier. maybe in mad max world I'll be able to trade an ape for a gallon of petrol but I just don't see it.
Come on dude, if you want crypto to be a serious and sane alternative to banks, there's a lot of cleaning up to do
Like getting rid of the crooked exchanges and the festering scams that represent the vast majority of crypto use today
Crypto definitely has potential, but for now it's nothing more than yet another racket for the israelites
Basically, there's unbreakable encrypted thingy associated with the NFT to give it a percieved value as a true "original" which is kind of a cool conceptual idea when it comes to digital art since everything is replicable online, to have a tradable token of something denoted as the original digital art piece.
Problem is, it's on a centralized database that could go down at any time, so you might aswell upload your art to your own personal website until you're dead and the website goes down.
Most people don't care about the interesting conceptual applications, they just use it to grift and generate money from the worst art imaginable.
>Basically, there's unbreakable encrypted thingy
No such thing. I remember the early Crypto-bullshitters selling Bitcoin as a way to untraceably move money around, when it's INCREDIBLY traceable. THE POINT IS EVERYONE IS TRACING THE BLOCKCHAIN.
You don't seem to understand, I'm not talking about traceablity, I'm talking about not being able to replicate the unique encrypted code that makes an NFT what it is, if it were breakable I'd be stealing NFTs daily, directly, instead of simply scamming.
If Bitcoin were breakable, I'd be emptying all the wallets in existence and crashing the market. People will worry when quantum computing arrives, that's when everything is probably fricked if there aren't quantum proof measures already.
Also. You can make Bitcoin untraceable in many ways, you could do a submarine swap (which is trustless) in lightning: untraceable. You could swap BTC to XMR: untraceable. You could use Coinjoin.
>People will worry when quantum computing arrives
People won't know for years when quantum computing arrives.
Quantum computers already exist, dinguses.
nah lol
meds
>Also. You can make Bitcoin untraceable in many ways
The couple that stole billion in crypto were able to launder about 100k of it, and the law was able to trace it to them and also recover pretty much all of it.
What? In 2016? Obviously they did it in the most moronicly braindead way imaginable, 100k is nothing. There's many options to launder your BTC now and it's as easy as pie.
don't bother trying to explain crypto to Cinemaphile users, their understanding of it is skimming articles about it on the news
>what the FRICK is NFT
It is a sound investment.
>In March 2021 an NFT of Twitter founder Jack Dorsey's first-ever tweet sold for $2.9 million. The same NFT was listed for sale in 2022 at $48 million, but only achieved a top bid of $280.
Its content-free DRM
I think this video does a good job at explaining it.
It's just a new age MLM scheme.
Who the frick is the old woman with the pigtails in the trailer for that show?
>paying for an image bad
>paying for a collection of moving images good
Couldn't you just hire a decent character designer to draw a new character and make THAT an NFT for a lot less money?
Why the frick use this specific pre-made monkey character?
buttholes steal art and make NFTs of them all the time. Why not just make an NFT out of a new character?
Ugh. This zoomer crypto shit is so dumb. I say that and Green is a millennial / GenXer my age, but he's acting like one of those 20 something kids.
It’s a mixture of fomo, extreme stupidity, and rich people constantly looking for better “investments”
Because NFT's are literally just digital trading cards. The worth is in what the brand is. Bored Apes are pretending they're worth something by feigning popularity.
It's just a bubble, that's it, the difference being they're building a world on its own out of speculation hoping that eventually intrinsic value will catch up. 95% of leading voices in the space are from people who have a sizeable investment in this or that item, doing everything in their power and using any degree of obfuscation to keep the value up. If you're not understanding much of it it's because it's so by design
how was it stolen?
Phishing. Seth clicked on a phishing link. It's that easy.
Don't click on email links is like the first thing anyone tells you when you touch a computer.
he gave his friend the information and then pretended to pay him for it so they could get some free advertising for his new shitty show
ill bet my left nut he never filed a police report, if any of you autists wanted to dig into this you could blow it wide open
i am selling this nft. let the bidding begin at $6000000
Six gorillion dollaz??
>Six gorillion dollaz??
Cool it with the antisemitism.
You finna be in trouble with that art, soulful ass white boy
all I can give you is a fake $20 bill
a carton of gays sir?
Best I can do is ten bucks, I mean, the storage costs and the chance I won't be reposting this alone is going to set me back quite a bit.
I used to laugh at people dumb enough to assign any value whatsoever to NFTs, then I remembered the israelites actually convinced people to pay each other with paper so.
Here's Money Stuff's Matt Levine's (sarcastic) take on it:
Well this is pretty stupid:
On Saturday, [actor Seth] Green teased a trailer for White Horse Tavern at the NFT conference VeeCon. A twee comedy, the show seems to be based on the question, “What if your friendly neighborhood bartender was Bored Ape Yacht Club #8398?” In an interview with entrepreneur and crypto hype man Gary Vaynerchuk, Green said he wanted to imagine a universe where “it doesn't matter what you look like, what only matters is your attitude.”
Unfortunately for Green, what also matters is copyright law. And when the actor’s NFT collection was pilfered by a scammer in early May, he lost the commercial rights to his show’s cartoon protagonist, a scruffy Bored Ape named Fred Simian, whose likeness and usage rights now belong to someone else.
“I bought that ape in July 2021, and have spent the last several months developing and exploiting the IP to make it into the star of this show,” Green told Vaynerchuk. “Then days before — his name is Fred by the way — days before he’s set to make his world debut, he’s literally kidnapped.” Green did not respond to a tweet from BuzzFeed News regarding the show.
What a stroke of luck! If someone hadn’t stolen his ape he’d have to make the show. It would be funny if the liability to make the show went with the ape, like, if the anonymous teen or whoever who tricked Green into giving up his ape (or the subsequent purchaser) now has to write and star in the show. I would probably watch that. No, no, just kidding, I would never watch a Bored Ape show for any reason. Anyway I don’t think intellectual-property law works like … any of this … but I also don’t care.[3] If Seth Green wants to not make a Bored Ape comedy then that’s fine, the system worked.
>A twee comedy
ALL OF MY RAGE
cont.
He could just make the show with a slightly different drawing of an ape? Like the person who supposedly stole his ape now supposedly owns the intellectual-property rights connected to Bored Ape Yacht Club #8398, but that person does not own the concept of “a cartoon ape with an attitude.” “What if your friendly neighborhood bartender was a member of the Blasé Bonobos Boat Club,” the show could ask, and the ape could hold his cigarette like this instead of like that. No, I’m sorry, I will stop suggesting solutions, I don’t care, don’t make the show, everything is fine.
I am going to start a business that offers celebrities the following service:
I will sell you a Bored Ape.
Then I will steal it.
Then you can go on talk shows and talk about how you had a Bored Ape and it got stolen, which is the defining experience of modern celebrity.
If you have not gone on a talk show to talk about your Bored Ape getting stolen, are you really a celebrity? In today’s competitive attention economy, celebrities need a Bored Ape thief at least as much as they need an agent or a stylist or someone to post on TikTok. Your Bored Ape thief plays a critical role in building your public image, and you want to hire the best possible Bored Ape thief. Here at Money Stuff Bespoke Bored Ape Thieves we have spent an industry-leading five minutes thinking about this joke, and what other Bored Ape thieves can match that experience? Lots of them, probably.
If I manage the pipeline right I’ll only need one Bored Ape. Just keep selling it to a celebrity, stealing it back, selling it again. What amazing provenance that ape will have when I eventually sell it to someone for real. “Buy the Bored Ape that Seth Green and Justin Bieber and Snoop Dogg and Donald Trump and Elon Musk all owned, briefly,” I will say, and some billionaire will pay me millions of dollars for it. Then I will steal it again because that will make it even funnier.
The idea is if you develop the property … add value to the NFT .. then you can sell the NFT for more. So how does this differ from developing a regular show, and then selling it? A regular show, functionally can only really be sold to another studio and distributor etc, that knows what to do with a show and IP. A show tied to an NFT Ben be sold to anyone, which increase its investment and speculative value. The owner of the NFT then enters into licensing agreement with studio and distributor to use the related content. That’s the theory. In the real world not a lot of studios and distributors are going to want shows if the IP/NFT isnt secured; actors and producer with back end points aren’t interest if their reap runs and distribution is going to fricked with because if IP and complex agreements. It’s one of those “this is going to disrupt” bullshit things that makes money for lawyers and wall street bros who “want a piece of hollywood”
>Unfortunately for Green, what also matters is copyright law. And when the actor’s NFT collection was pilfered by a scammer in early May, he lost the commercial rights to his show’s cartoon protagonist
Completely false, NFTs don't give you any type of ownership rights to an image.
An NFT is a hyperlink stored on a blockchain.
The whole thing is pure sarcasm at the outright absurdity of paying a fortune for a digital receipt for an image, something Levine does with regularity on his newsletter.
>Green said he wanted to imagine a universe where “it doesn't matter what you look like, what only matters is your attitude.”
Shit man. I mean...my mind is blown
Pssst. Hey kid. Wanna buy a frog?
I own several hundred NFTs and made over 6 figures dumping them on people over the last 12 months AMA
Who the frick buys this shit? Do true believers actually exist, or is it just scammers all the way down hoping they won't be the ones to hold the bags in the end?
It's absurdly rich celebrities and crypto-whales throwing cash at each other like pies in a Hollywood food-fight.
I would say for cryptopunks are legit status symbol, beyond that it's mostly people looking to dump on the next guy. I always thought it was moronic until I got involved then i felt myself getting a kind of attachment to them. Once they got more popular the scammers and low effort garbage really did proliferate.
Is cryptopunk the buzzword people use to tell others they spend money on JPGs? That's good to know.
They aren't "buying" Jpegs. They are buying digital receipts "proclaiming" they own a Jpeg.
cryptopunks are the first nft on ethereum, and have some of the highest per unit sales ever. To you it's like looking at the most valuable stamp in the world---just paper and ink that's fundamentally worth nothing, but to Ethereum people, it's pretty much the biggest flex there is.
this is cope. you won't have many opportunities in your life to get stupid rich from the comfort of your bedroom anon.
There's more than one way to fleece idiots on the internet from your bedroom, I'm not a digital grifter and won't hop to the opportunity provided by NFTs. It's not a cope, I'm just not a greedy grifter painting it as a legitimate exercise in "creativity" or whatever you tell yourself.
It's textbook cope. Art is always about what the buyer is willing to pay. When i purchase one, I do it with the full knowledge that I might not be able to resell it; I do it anyway. Thus I have no sympathy for people that lose money on them or are unable to sell their bags later. It's like a videogame to me, it provides endless entertainment and watching bugmen seethe about it on plebbit and here just makes the gains all that much sweeter.
You say this like I have a shred of respect for the people who middleman the art market for the drug-dealers needing to launder their profits.
You could be making dosh whoring out your little sisters, congrats I guess? Wouldn't involve myself at all in it?
>look anon fricking absolute morons are throwing piles of money at the stupid shit possible.... why would I ever get involved with that?
you really gonna compare selling a work of art to a willing buyer to coercing a minor into prostituion?
Yeah. You should have listened to your fricking parents and stopped staring at your sister's breasts. Look what she turned in to. Look what YOU turned in to.
I'm based
you have to go back
>you really gonna compare selling a work of art to a willing buyer to coercing a minor into prostituion?
When it's a transparent front to spend a hundred million dollars on a shit-smear to launder monies gained from drugs and human-trafficking? You bet your ass I am.
Money laundering is LITERALLY about having a shit ton of illicit (read crime) sourced millions that banks won't touch, and using that cash to buy a moronic piece of art at an auction house at a preposterous valuation, getting that meaningless piece of shit-art (and the receipt), reselling it for whatever percentage you bought it for (if you are lucky even more), then paying TAXES (you don't care about the rate, as now your gained monies are legit and bankable).
>it's pretty much the biggest flex there is.
So its someone that got a shiny pikachu card or a black lotus magic card, but not even physical.
>I always thought it was moronic until I got involved
It never stopped being moronic for a single instant tho. Even if you won.
Reminds me of the downie they put out as a victoria's secret model.
It's really unfortunate that they started with shitty JPG's. NFT's are a legitimate thing that will keep getting bigger and ARE NOT JUST FOR STUPID PICTURES. They can be used to establish ownership on all sorts of digital assets beyond a jpg, but goddamn if there isn't a huge movement to embarrass and belittle them right now.
>NFT's are a legitimate thing that will keep getting bigger
People said this about tulip bulbs for a while. Poos declare it about a new shitcoin roughly every 30 seconds.
There isn't a single usecase for NFTs that wouldn't be served better by some previously existing non-crypto solution.
Are you concerned about being judged for your actions in the afterlife
im starting to think the NFT show was a front just to pump the value of his NFT collectio and dipshit mcgee failed to predict the crash of crypto
a "twee comedy" about a cartoon ape bartender, that preview didnt even seem real
so many layers to the depths of their shenanigans
>Can "own" a "real" character on the show
human trafficking going mainstream
Oh frick I got a rarer one somehow oh shit I'm rich now
go sell it for 300k and get back to us
Literally dumber shit has happened. One guy bought an NFT of an invisible (non-existent) work of art, another guy did an NFT of him destroying that invisible (non-existent) work.
This puts in perspective House floor arguments against raising taxes on the class of people who have the free cash to "invest" millions on digital receipts.
That may be, but what the 'hurr i screenshotted it heehee' trenchbrains don't realize is that the receipt confers the right to sell the original--this is literally the entire value prop. Art is fricking stupid.
We realize that moron. We're making fun of the idea that scarcity actually exists when something is digitized. It's not a one-of-a-kind painting. It's not even a physical poster of a one-of-a-kind painting. It's a chain of numbers. Cope. If you own NFTs I can probably scrounge up some Beanie Babies to sell you.
but it's provably scarce anon
Oh really?
holy shit lmao louvregays btfo
post the erc721 addy and we can have a talk
Wow! Look how fricking scarce this one is!! I can't believe we managed to see it! Say anon, would you be interested in some magic beans of a really cool wardrobe formerly worn by a great emperor? You seem like a smart guy, I have to let you know only the smartest people can see the clothes...
I'll say it again, it's rich idiots and crypto whales throwing money-pies at each other for lulz, and opportunists wanting to sell them pies to throw at each other at ridiculous cost. The ridiculous cost is what makes it Funneh and Trendy.
again, try to sell that. what you are missing is the explicit right to sell a unique piece, which you objecitvely do not have.
so what? selling a shirt with the mona lisa does not make the louvre any less the owner of the mona lisa
>https://opensea.io/collection/buck-breaking
How about I give you an exclusive deal on some Buck Breaking NFTs?
that was a really nice collection
Cinemaphile austists probably don't, but for normal people, especially twitter users, being able to prove credentials is frickin massive
>It's scarce because you own a receipt! And you can sell that receipt! How do you not get this?! It's scarce! Stop making fun of the fact the image is reproducible and starts its life digitized! FRICK YOU! I'M MOVING TO THE METAVERSE
Holy shit you're fricking dumb.
i might be dumb but I'm the one dumping this shit for real money lmfao
I'm sure you're making a tonne and you can bring it up in your next job interview without sounding like a sperg.
i already made it anon shitposting has been my job for the last 4 years
whether you bought a piece of paper or an nft from harvard makes no difference. solution looking for a solved problem.
Paintings are just physical nfts. All worthless
Sure, the receipt is scarce, but not the infinitely reproducible monkey jpeg attached to it. For that matter, there doesn't even need to be a monkey jpeg attached at all, the receipt would still be scarce. Problem is, what would anyone want a receipt for? It would be immediately obvious that however scarce the receipt may be, it's useless horseshit that doesn't provide value to anyone. Thus come in the nigh zero effort monkey jpegs to trick the brain into thinking that the receipt is for something tangible. In reality you acquire nothing you'd ordinarily want, except for the chance to sell hot air to a sucker who probably doesn't want it either except for selling it to yet another sucker.
why would anyone want an original painting when you can just buy a print that's just as good?
>why would anyone want an original painting when you can just buy a print that's just as good?
To impress their circle of rich idiot friends.
The exact reason you buy a Bored Ape NFT, to advertise to your social circles that "Hey! I'm successful/rich enough to piss money away on this stupid trend, isn't that cool!? Pls gib attention and more celebrity for doing this thing!"
Seth paid a lot of money to let it be known that he's in a cool kid club, planned to do a show to make his membership in the club even cooler, and publicly paid even MORE money to shout "LOOK, I'M IN THE EVEN MORE EXCLUSIVE CLUB OF PEOPLE WHO'S COOL APE WAS STOLEN, I'M SO COOL NOW! PLS LOOK AT ME!"
very well said. that is the point and value prop. you can flex on other people on the internet
tl;dr Seth Green is "a celebrity", half of that is "being famously recognized by people" and the other half is monetizing that recognition.
Bored Ape Yacht Club is a way to seek notoriety.
A select few want the original for bragging rights, but most purely for money laundering. Take away the money laundering motive, then yes, buying an absurdly overpriced original is stupid under the assumption that your goal is enjoying beauty. And therein is the difference. The original Mona Lisa would be a nice addition to your living room. It has value outside of money laundering and gambling. The original cryptopunk #123 has no value outside homosexuals gambling with digital assets instead of physical ones. The whole community is trying really, really hard to pretend that their jpeg receipts are just the same as art collecting, but that's just gaslighting. Nobody gives a flying about the "art" attached to their receipts. Nobody. It's all just gambling and scamming. Paintings meanwhile derive their original value from the fact that there actually is a market for people who wish to enjoy beauty. And there would still be a market for paintings even if the state actually cracked down on all the shady transactions going down in auction houses.
money laundering is llterally the most low IQ seethe take there is. Literally everything on chain is traceable. If you have money onchain and want to launder it, you'd use tornado cash, not fricking open sea. Please don't talk about things you really do not understand.
Stop being stupid. The point isn't to "move illicit money around on the Blockchain". That isn't laundering. The point of NFT (or art) money laundering is to buy/sell things that have no easily determinate intrinsic value for vast sums, pay taxes on those vast sum transactions, and thus make them legit in the eyes of the banks and IRS.
For trad art I'd agree, but for NFTs what you're saying is completely moronic if you have a basic understand of the nature of blockchains. By defintion you're moving from one speculative assets to another in a way that's fully traceable. It doesn't gain any legitmacy by going through opensea.
Money isn't laundered by being physically moved to a bank; or moved on the blockchain.
Money becomes laundered when it's source is or becomes something legitimate banking operations accept as legit;
When Big Bank says "Oh that is the money you made from selling cartoon monkeys, that is legit and we will handle that for you", THEN it is laundered, no matter how you really made most of it.
yes, which works if you buy art with cash and there is no KYC, but to put your cash onchain, you HAVE to do KYC. Once it is onchain it's fully traceable, so trying to obfuscate through nft flips does literally no good.
TRACING the movement is meaningless.
Let me break it down simply:
If you are Joe Pepe, wage slave, and you go to deposit $50 million dollars tomorrow, alarms will go off at the bank, you will be asked a lot of questions, the IRS will call you and you will be investigated. BUT.
If you are Chadley Smith who operates NFTinc, and generated and trade 10's of millions in random monkey pictures, most of which you can generate at zero cost, it will just be another day.
People (who are anonymous) are sending you huge sums (over the blockchain, and yes they can see it moving from A to B) and you are giving them monkeys. Your bank doesn't care where Anonymous got the money from, they just care that you make it selling legit monkeys.
Ok if you can sell 50mm worth of monkey jpegs why the frick are you bothering to launder money? seems to me you're more profitable as a legit artist
Learn to read. The traditional art market is rife with money laundering, because regulations are incredibly loose. You can put up high sums of money at Sotheby's and remain anonymous. The NFT "art" market is a little different, I'm surmising it's mostly about gambling, but that doesn't make it any better. If the traditional art market wouldn't allow for money laundering, people would still buy paintings regardless, because paintings are nice to have and nice to look at. If the NFT "art" market wouldn't allow gambling, nobody would buy a single NFT ever again, because nobody actually cares for AI generated monkey pictures and even less for the receipts of monkey pictures.
someone I know made a bunch of shitty nft art and laundered his mixed drug money coins through it by buying the art, so the government wouldn't question where his income came from. he even made a bunch of ads all over the place to make it more legit
lmfao sorry that your friend is moronic but that wouldn't fool any auditor
it did, he did it over the course of a year and paid a sizeable amount from his legit money to advertise his nfts and there were even legit buyers mixed in, no doubt after seeing the price action
Imagine thinking any of that money will find its way into useful social programmes and not simply bloating the bureaucracy
god, fkn samsung, you had to enable enhanced usability just to tap instead of slide too eh?
and then you click on the usability icon twenty times a day... fk
Frick! Frick! Frick! THE ALARM IS GOING OFF!
return the monke < retvrn to monke
What a cuck. Paying for NFTs in the first place but paying someone that stole it to give it back is about the dumbest thing you could've done.
the guy who stole it sold it to some guy from australia. that's the guy that Seth bought it from
That's the most pathetic celeb story I've ever heard. More pathetic than Britney Spears shaving her head
psst, hey kid
wanna buy some NFTs?
he cute
So is collecting NFTs just a new monetized version of collecting rare Pepes via the blockchain?
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
hahaha
god give me strength while i go read a twitter thread
>capture and conviction
>seth takes it serious
based as frick
I fricking hate israelites
I still have no idea what NFT is
Just here to say I fricking hate myself for putting $1k into Ethereum a year ago.
ape escaped
If I ever start a NFT rug pull project, it'll be the raging wojaks from Cinemaphile every time their shitty memecoins crash again.
>buy some incredibly volatile meme currency at leverage
>throw monies at some Poos "incredible opportunity sirs" new offering
>It's gone
>AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Never is not funny.
Seth Green has made frick you money with his production company just making garbage cartoons. Robot Chicken was terrible
>Robot Chicken was terrible
legitimately irredeemable, worse thing adult swim ever put out, even worse than super milk chan
>worse thing adult swim ever put out
They have most certainly made worse material than Robot Chicken.
well then name them, buster
pic related
Mr Pickles
Not really, it was equally as hack as ATHF and Sealab2020 and Space Ghost, but you don't have the stones to see it.
The NFT I care about is Black folk fricking teens
The fact that he fought so hard to buy it back is just going to encourage people to steal it again for easy money.
>guy hustled seth green for 100k
based as frick
>stolen
NFTs can't be stolen, whoever is in possession of the token owns it
The same as cars, amiright?
they can be when they're gained through illicit means, but proving it is iffy
Why can't noobs itt work out it's a flex
If I had 100m to waste I'd buy a few boxxy nfts for the lulz too
sometimes flexing isn't actually impressive.
He's out an additional 300k, how is that winning?
He can now proceed with his cringe show as planned.
Eminem always sucked
imagine stealing a pic and selling it back to the autist for 300k thats crazy dude
What’s stopping you from just slightly changing a single pixel of a jpg so that it is still visually identical with the unchanged one and then just make it a new NFT, how would you even distinguish them meaningfully?
Why would even bother to change a pixel? Just mint a new NFT with the exact same hyperlink inside.
I still don't get it. The NFT doesn't grant him any ownership of the image or allow him to distribute it. The original artist can still sue him for copyright infringement.
BAYC NFTs actually do come with copyright.
Only the original sale. Subsequent sales don't necessarily include any ownership, you could sell the NFT and not the rights to use said image.
>Only the original sale
No, subsequent sales are included, the rights are transferred between all owners