Upon further reflection, it seems like it's for the same reason I'd go pay a museum to let me see a rock sample from Mars, but wouldn't go to so a rock sample from an iron-rich American desert which would be visually indistinguishable to me from one from Mars. There's just something about something being "the real one".

I also had the thought that maybe I missed your point completely and ranted nonsense in my last comments! It hadn't even occurred to me: Why would somebody want to view the NFT-backed identical copy of a digital image if they are NOT a collector?? I can't explain it, but I do note that I'd be far more likely to go view the real Mona Lisa than a copy that was, to my unsophisticated eye, exactly identical to the original. Maybe a lot of people wouldn't feel that way. I don't see a logical reason to want to view the original in such a case, but my feeling is that I would.

Also, the first purchaser gets to know he's supporting the artist! That would matter to some people, such as myself...

Why would a viewer care if he was looking at the Mona Lisa, vs a copy that was good enough that he couldn't tell the difference? A collector would pay a lot more for the original Mona Lisa than for a known copy, no matter how accurate. Same with NFT's, with the only difference being that it would be literally impossible to distinguish the one not backed by the NFT. For an average viewer, though, that difference is moot, because they wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the Mona Lisa and a really great copy. So I think the key is that some people are collectors. They would care. People who only want to see the image wouldn't. That being said, I think it IS possible for the NFT to be digitally signed in such a way that the true buyer could be sent a private key that would unlock the full resolution image, and anybody could see the image in less resolution. I think there is stuff like that being done, where anyone can see a rough version of the artwork, but only the buyer of the NFT gets the key. If Lynne wanted to do that, I could look into it.

Hi again Sri, yes, Sad for Russell, but he was still brilliant! I think you might enjoy this anecdote I posted some time ago involving Godel and Einstein.

Hi Sri, nice to meet you. "" An artist can also create the equivalent of limited edition prints by creating a fixed number of NFTs that are identical except for ownership information." Gary, Good ideas" Just to be clear, that's not an idea of mine, that's already being very actively done on OpenSea and elsewhere. I agree with your comments about associating physical art with NFTs. I don't think that's the future of NFTs. BUT, I do think that as things stand right now, a non-digital artist who publicizes her work by creating NFTs for it may be able to make sales she wouldn't have had access to otherwise. Not sure about how effective it really would be for marketing, but I do think it's plausible that it could help.

Nope, didn't know that about the numpy function. Thanks for commenting, it's amazing to see this post still reaching anyone after 10+ years!