People have touched on this above in many ways, but I thought I’d restate it again for better clarity:
The key problem with NFTs is that people are using the wrong metaphor for them. They believe it represents “ownership” of something, like the title to a car. That’s not what they are. It’s a receipt, like to prove you bought something at a 7-11. That’s all it is. Proof you had something in your possession at some point in the past. It’s an electronic version of the tiny square of paper that the cashier gives you when you buy something, and serves the same purpose- proof you bought/transacted something, and if anyone cares that said transaction occurred (such as if the store is deciding whether to take it back) then it has tiny value in that moment. It has no other value.
It’s not like when you sell a DVD player on craigslist that you have to give the new owner the original receipt from Best Buy from 12 years ago to prove it’s really their DVD player now. But that is (bafflingly) how people are treating NFTs in usage and in the press. People really really want it to be a thing that it isn’t.
