The only use case I can think of after so many years of this shit is gaming and no company did it successfully. All the triple A gaming companies would rug pull you eventually anyway, so I dont really see even how it could work in fiat gaming companies.

Issuing monke jpegs on Bitcoin is truly appalling. And a beautiful way to finish any possible connection to plebs.

Thank you shitcoin magazine, GFY.

With collectibles it comes down to either scarcity (more demand than supply) or a personal/sentimental connection giving it value. Physical objects can be scarce. Digital files are not. There may be personal/sentimental reasons for a person to want to pay for a digital file (a movie, for instance), but that does not make it scarce. NFTs in general are masqueraded as something they are not—digital scarcity. The particular behavior coming from Bitcoin Magazine here not only claims that these digital files are scarce, but that they are forever attached to a serialized satoshi, which does not even exist in the bitcoin protocol. Satoshis don’t actually exist at all! They are simply a unit of measure for denominating UTXOs. If people or companies want to buy and sell digital files, then so be it. But Bitcoin Magazine falsely representing bitcoin something other than what it is, and actively attempting to profit off of their misrepresentations, is extremely problematic.