top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 130 points 8 months ago (3 children)

What an indictment of our society that this fuck ass ever had that much money and now has more

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    His net worth is over 2 billion now. It's revolting.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Where are you seeing such a high figure? This article from 2025 says $150 million. I know he has Celsius and wrestling but 2 billion seems like BS

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 20 points 8 months ago

    I also saw $150 million, which is more than he deserves but it's mostly because of ownership. Wealth snowballs so even if you make terrible life decisions after the initial investments, you usually come out with even more money.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 42 points 8 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 18 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    Certainly my guess. No way he was actually dumb enough to pay over £600,000 just for an image someone could "steal" 1:1 just by copying and pasting.

    It was almost certainly a way to move money somewhere while retaining plausible deniability, just like with all the other scams projects he's been part of over the years

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago

    I think it's the exact opposite - no money actually changed hands. They just sell worthless crap to each other to make it look valuable to suckers.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 39 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    no one else going to point out that Logan Paul is somehow not the worst person in that picture

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 42 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    For anyone wondering, she's a conservative influencer who worked with BlazeTV, Toilet Paper USA, contributed opinion pieces to RT and, unsurprisingly, has ties to the Russian government.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 39 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    How the hell is it even worth $155?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 8 months ago (6 children)

    I kinda wish NFTs were still somewhat popular, they were such an effective indicator for the dumbest people alive.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago* (4 children)

    They still are.

    Though MAGA red hats are a really close second.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (2 children)

    I don’t live in the US. Do people really wear these hats out in public?

    And if so, what the hell is everyone else’s excuse for allowing them to feel safe doing so?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    NFTs are actually very interesting tech with a very real use case. However, just like crypto currencies, their actual use case is so boring you'd literally consider falling asleep as someone explained it. As someone who actually learned what NFTs were long before they got big, I knew what once they hit mainstream, I should keep my money as far away from it as humanly possible.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 79 points 8 months ago (13 children)

    Nah, it’s genius. A fantastic way to laundry money. It’s like buying paintings but you don’t even need to pay someone to appraise it or a good painter with some sort of good technique.

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 8 months ago (12 children)

    Yeah, but do paintings typically lose almost all of their value? I thought the idea was that the value should either stay the same or go up.

    Either way, in this case, it couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 50 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    The point here is say you are in business with X party but it's illegal. X party can buy an nft worth nothing or generate one. You buy the NFT for the amount of your bill with X party. You've now technically not paid them for whatever illegal thing, instead you bought an nft from them. You could also break this down into multiple NFTs, buying 100 $100 NFTs from various "owners" that don't link back to X party through shell companies, and you've now paid them $10,000 "for pictures of chimps".

    NFTs only exist for money laundering and illicit transfers. Once they've been transferred their value no longer matters, the business has been done.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    NFTs only exist for money laundering and illicit transfers

    And at least to some degree scamming people even if that's not the main focus. I know a few people that got full on scammed by it

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Thank you! Now for the first time, i finally see the slightest sense in NFTs. I really didn't get it from the start. I heard various explanations and they never made any sense to me. Left me confused every time until now.

    Its just a mask for a deal in the background. Ok now i get it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago

    Yep.

    My buddy once went to a farmer’s market where they weren’t allowed to sell beer, but they were allowed to give it away. So he did the oldest trick in the book: scooped up a bunch of rocks in a box, put up a sign that said “Rocks $5,” and “Free beer with purchase of rock.”

    NFTs are just the rock.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    For Logan Paul, yes, he wanted it to go up.

    But if this painting was laundering at work, the important part is that the seller can point to this transaction as "real". The IRS or the FBI might be looking into his sudden gains of half a million dollars, but when they do, they find that he sold Logan Paul half a million dollars of art.

    The NFT part makes it incredibly easy to generate said art. Before NFTs, rich people would mark up paintings, and those had to go up in value, because they would buy them at 100,000$ and sell them for 200,000$, so the government would see 100,000$ of profit, but the next guy with the painting, he'd have to sell it for 300,000, claiming 100,000$ in profit, and the next guy, 400,000$, you get the idea.

    NFTs can lose value in a way real art isnt allowed to because anyone can claim that's the price, and after the sale, they can be discarded as trash, essentially. New ones can be made in bulk for no effort, and its alright to sell 1000 NFTs at 100$ each, because you can just keep making them and "selling" them and no one has to care about their value in the same way because they're mass producible without that crashing the market.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    It is also important to mention that you don't actually own any art with NFTs. You own a link pointing to the art, but the art itself is not owned by the owner of the NFT.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    I don't think that's actually all that important. It's fundamental to an understanding of NFTs, but not their role in any sort of money-laundering, since you can also just make NFTs using some AI-generated art or make 5000 NFT's from one low-effort art you do own.

    All money laundering needs is the non-fungible part, which is easy to do, just stamp the corner with a limited-edition numbering mark and the 500 fungible digital tokens of a single art become 500 nonfungible tokens.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    "Today it is worth $155."

    LMAO. No.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 20 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    $155 looks a little high to be honest.

    The very idea of NFTs were wild. You don't own a physical image, you own something kind of like a copyright to an image but you don't in fact own the actual copyright. But it's gonna cost you alot of money and somehow make you even more money someday.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    You own a sign with a link to the image.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 8 months ago

    Odd, I always thought they were a means to launder your money.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 8 months ago

    I used to think Bitcoin was a ponzi scheme. I still do, dut I used to, too

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    i fucking loved NFT startups in 2021. it was the definition of easy money. I had like 20 clients like that in 2021 alone and it was the shit. the funniest bit is that literally none of these companies or projects were around by the time 2023 started - all wiped out and most of these entrepreneur bros just moved on to do disposable AI startups instead with equally nothingburger results. what's baffling is that these motherfuckers still manage to raise investments for some bullshit pie in the sky but actual techies with ideas struggle to get a quarter worth of financing even though their ideas actually have legs

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)

    They have the resonating rhetoric, charisma, personal connections, and delusional enthusiasm necessary to wow investors. Wooing investors is a skill unrelated to technical understanding.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    and its fucking annoying that these folks get the best opportunities - in a better world they would've been shoved away in the sales department doing the good deed but nah ain't happening

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 8 months ago

    Can confirm, I took one look at NFTs back in 2021 and immediately said "that's fucking stupid."

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    I somehow....didn't fall for these?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Who with a clear mind and IQ above 0 would fall for that? Seriously!?

    In Germany, we have a great saying for such stupid people: “As dumb as a five-meter (~5.5 yard) dirt road.”

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    you don't grift a shitty product because you think it's worth something, you grift it because you think someone else will.

    The ones hoarding toilet paper during the pandemic didn't do so because they thought it was an intrinsically sublime product. They did it for the grift

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    NFT? you mean money laundering?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago

    oh throw up its lauren chen

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    It's like a tax on stupidity.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Isn't it worth exactly what the highest bidder will pay? Where would the $155 number come from? Seems like an NFT famously owned by Logan Paul would sell for more than $155 anyway. Not saying he'd make a profit here...

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    How much is it worth in Trumpcoin?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago

    Sorry, that's not worth $155.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 8 months ago

    And yet this degenerate asshole is worth ~$150M Laying out bare, being 'smart' has no bearing on wealth.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Get fucked.

    We had this ruining the art world right before AI started taking its shot.

    NFTs died miserably.

    Now it's AI's turn.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago

    It was content. He likely made more off of the clowns that made him a millionaire than it cost.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago

    Why is it even worth $155?

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago

    What I want to know is how it's still worth $155?

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago

    It wasn’t stupid SOMEBODY made a shitload of money - his money.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Terrible investment. That was probably like 2 months of his income.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago

    To be fair, there are active buy offers for that one for ~$5k. The $155 figure is a collection offer, meaning someone is ready to buy anything in that collection, no matter how shitty it is. And, at practically zero liquidity (only one of those ever sot sold after minting), the concept of value becomes meaningless, he could accept the offer and take back $5k, he could list it at something like $20k and it'd likely quickly sell, or he could bullshit one of his rich friends to buy it from him for a million... or he could print that out and jerk it off to it, the therapeutic effect of which might be worth millions for his entertainment business, who knows.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    If it was easy to buy, I would pay $5 for this thing, so I could tell the three people in my life that would be amused by my owning it. That's the floor on the market, for this particular one - so it still has a long way to fall.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago

    Id probably have bought it as a sticker for 0.50 or a dollar when I was 10

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago

    Not Financially Tenable

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Is this the guy who got his jaw busted, and now wants to fight a football player?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    That scam exists because of all the deregulation. With proper regulation all the people pushing NFTs would have had to pay back all they stole.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago

    Wouldn't even pay for his jaw repairs these days

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago

    But the Metaverse!!!!

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago

    Is that Lauren Chen, the Russian agent?

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    I bought for the first time a few NFTs this year. Basically that was the only way for me to buy FIFA WC26 tickets in the FIFA blockchain.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    Who owns it now? I suppose thé value change when its sold. Any wat to sée thé past grades?

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    Like a lot of the art world, I'm pretty sure these were mainly used for money laundering.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    I'm very sure it's the same kind of shit with the retro game ratings https://youtu.be/rvLFEh7V18A

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)

    Trends often look obvious in hindsight. What’s interesting is how every cycle teaches people something new about hype, risk, and timing.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    Big Philomena Cunk energy in that comment.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    the Pauls so thier grift was dying "targeting children for views" so they pivoted to maga.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    not f'n there

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    NFTs were 2021? Damn that was a while ago.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    Then he made it all back on a Pokemon card, right?

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    8 comments in c/Memes@lemmy.dbzer0.com view that post