In the coming collectivist dystopian future, the only type of permitted individualism will be minor cosmetic alterations to your government-issued NFT avatar. 
My NFT hot take is that the second an NFT is part of a series or collection, it ceases to be nonfungible, even if market forces assign arbitrarily different values to them. At the end of the day, any two beanie babies are interchangeable unless you're a beanie baby collector.
A quarter that's 100 years old will get more money at a coin auction than a quarter from last year. That doesn't make quarters nonfungible. Someone willing to pay more for one over the other doesn't determine fungibility.
"Ahh, but does that make Monet's Water Lilies series fungible?"
The difference here is that despite being "part of a series," they're all original works from scratch, not alterations to a copy and pasted template. In a way, this is exactly what Andy Warhol was critiquing.
The difference here is that despite being "part of a series," they're all original works from scratch, not alterations to a copy and pasted template. In a way, this is exactly what Andy Warhol was critiquing.
Problem is you can pursue this to absurdity - to a person about to freeze to death, the Mona Lisa is fungible with an IKEA chair in terms of material for a fire.
https://twitter.com/mbzzz6/status/1459518073090842624
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
