For some reason, I just bought a $60 Wayne Gretzky mystery container via a DraftKings drop. I can’t open it until a certain date. I think I can sell it unopened at some point, too.
1 Like
That might be the last time a “You remember when” flashback joke on Family Guy was funny.
1 Like
Yeah, i have 5 of them myself; bought 7 in the presale and flipped 3, then said fuck it and bought one in the public sale because GAMBOOOOOOOOOOOOL.
It’s not encouraging that they still aren’t sold out 2 hours after the public drop. I’m expecting to lose money if I don’t bink one of the rarer ones.
1 Like
Yeah, it’s definitely not great. I’m expecting to lose money unless I get lucky as well but I’m already several thousand deep so what’s a few hundred more you know?
Finally sold out and prices starting to rise. Need to decide if it’s +EV to hold for the reveal or flip before for a small profit.
16,600 sold
2,480 can’t be used to make a set
6,500 are spread on the lowest set
So slightly over half are either very low value or effectively worthless.
It really all boils down to are people going to chase carbon/platinum statues? If they do then we might not get totally destroyed given that well over half the supply is in those tiers. I’m gonna gamble and rip open my five because I don’t see much of a point in taking a $20 profit or whatever it is right now, but if the price keeps going up I may reconsider and flip a few more of these just to lower my average cost on the ones I keep.
I took a 20 dollar profit because i couldnt imagine why somethingn that was widely available for sale and wasnt picked up will now be worth more than it cost. Obv i was wrong because nothing makes sense
Man, that’s a lot of work to say a few things that should be extremely obvious to anyone: most NFT collections are visually homogeneous and the biggest predictor of future sales price is recent median sales price. I’m sort of curious to know what kind of hardware you’d need to run centrality measures on [checks notes] a data set with over six million observations. Can’t believe #ToppsMLB made it into a paper though.
It actually got published in nature which is enough to get that phd a job. Academia is a joke.
I’m assuming it’s one of the “first to market” papers on NFTs which is usually worth extra journal points. What’s interesting to me is that this is basically just an exploratory analysis (PCA) with a garbage prediction section (machine learning) thrown in. I suppose that’s something you can get away with when being the first to describe a phenomenon.
By the way, I was trying to write papers on this, i.e., markets/ownership of completely digital assets, ten years ago and was exploring it as a dissertation topic. I thought it was fascinating from a consumer psychology perspective which should be obvious now based on the kind of discussion that dominates this conversation (“What do you mean you own it? So I can just right click and download and now I own it too? Look, I just downloaded your thing and now I own it too. How can we both own it? There’s no way this is actually worth anything.”). The problem was that nobody in my department had any idea what I was talking about or why it would be important. Same with holding bitcoin at the time.
The takeaway for me is that being too early on an idea has little value. You basically have to time the market of ideas to reap the gains because no one is going to give a fuck about some weird thing you saw in advance until there’s tons of buzz and pEoPLe aRe SaYiNg iT’s WoRtH BiLLiOnZ. For all I know, some dude wrote the definitive treatise on non-fungible digital asset ownership in 1975, published it in some C-tier journal, didn’t make tenure, and might be posthumously remembered for being “ahead of his time” if someone finds that paper.
1 Like
Gregor Mendel founded modern genetics and nobody knew about it for like 100 years
SAD!
1 Like
the first whatever usually hasn’t won in the end, especially in technology where the current biggest thing in any of them, none of them were first.
The point I’m making isn’t really about being the absolute first, it’s about being way too early to effectively bring something to market, and specifically the market of ideas. In terms of academic papers, I can basically assure you that there will be a flood of papers on this that journals are dying to scoop up for press compared to ten years ago when they would have laughed at you for submitting the same paper.
right “smart” people wait till there’s some steam then pretend they’re some huge genius
1 Like
Georg Cantor was driven to deep depression after inventing set theory and being ridiculed by many of the top mathematicians of his day:
Cantor was again hospitalized in 1903. One year later, he was outraged and agitated by a paper presented by Julius König at the Third International Congress of Mathematicians. The paper attempted to prove that the basic tenets of transfinite set theory were false. Since the paper had been read in front of his daughters and colleagues, Cantor perceived himself as having been publicly humiliated. Although Ernst Zermelo demonstrated less than a day later that König’s proof had failed, Cantor remained shaken, and momentarily questioning God. Cantor suffered from chronic depression for the rest of his life, for which he was excused from teaching on several occasions and repeatedly confined in various sanatoria.