This AI response you pasted (sorry, it shows), is weak. I define ownership widely, not narrowly because I include a wide set of dispositions, not just those which suit NFT peddlers.
Look realistically, you have a token but the ownership of the content is determined by your relation to it. Just holding a private key doesn't mean you can do anything with it. Enforcement is in real world. Say you want to print a tshirt with an NFT I sold you a license to just view on a marketplace. Yeah, you own a receipt for having made a payment and can transfer it. I still can go sue you for breach.
Clearly there is something missing to having full ownership.
Anyway, the babble about rights is a distraction.
What's key to my opinion is the cryptopunk esthetic has scammy connotations and I'm surprised you went for it.
Fuxk ai Jester seriously. Focus on learning because you have homework to do.
Just to be clear - ownership of Ordinals is 100% real and cryptographically provable.
The inscription lives on-chain. It’s assigned to a specific satoshi.
I control the UTXO, I control the keys. That’s Bitcoin-native provenance.
You can disagree with the aesthetics. But saying this isn’t ownership? You’re just wrong.
And honestly, for someone defending Bitcoin, you should at least understand how it works.
Thread collapsed
Just enjoy my art or not..up to you.
I give not two fucks about CryptoPunks connotations. They are a staple of Pixel art, minimalism in form of NFTs. In 100 years people will still see and remember CryptoPunks.
Sorry to not fit into your image of Bitcoiner but Ima sovereign individual first and I keep out of all sorts of cliques.
It's a pretty good Idiot Punk for a musician I have to say 🤣.

Thread collapsed