The Person Who Made $69 Million from NFTs Four Years Ago Is Still Making Money

marsbitPublicado em 2025-12-09Última atualização em 2025-12-09

Resumo

Four# 1st-Project This is my first project

Author: Cookie

Beeple, the man who sold one NFT for a staggering $69 million, has long been seen as a symbol of the golden age of NFTs that once was.

Although the glory of NFTs has faded, Beeple and his team have remained active in the NFT circle. At this year's Art Basel, he brought another "golden dog" to the currently quiet NFT market—Regular Animals.

Yesterday, multiple Regular Animals sold for over 10 ETH (approximately $35,000) on OpenSea, and these works were given away for free at Art Basel, with a total of 256 pieces. At this price, Beeple essentially gave away nearly ten million dollars worth of NFTs at Art Basel.

The project that Beeple and his team brought to this Art Basel is precisely Regular Animals. These are a bunch of robot dogs, as shown in the image below. They look a bit eerie because these robot dogs have human faces, and they are faces of well-known figures like Musk, Andy Warhol, Zuckerberg, Picasso, and even Beeple himself.

Of course, it's not just the eerie visual effect; these robot dogs use the cameras on their heads to observe their surroundings and employ an evolving visual algorithm to create artworks.

The celebrities these robot dogs portray were not chosen arbitrarily. The reason for selecting the aforementioned figures is that they have influenced how humans view the world, whether through algorithms, art, or politics. As humans, we observe the world through these perspectives, and so do these robot dogs. At Art Basel, these robot dogs and humans observed each other, and the moments of observation became the artworks created by these robot dogs—artworks that also serve as autobiographies for these machines.

Interestingly, Regular Animals also has a physical series, with a total of 1,024 pieces. On eBay, someone has already listed one for sale at a fixed price of $6,500. The market's valuation suggests that NFTs are far more valuable than physical paintings, reminiscent of Damien Hirst's "The Currency" series years ago, which forced owners to choose between the physical and the NFT.

Before achieving great success in the NFT field, Beeple had been creating art every day since 2007 but had never sold anything for more than $100. After achieving fame and fortune, Beeple did not splurge like some artists or crypto project teams. He acquired a studio/gallery of about 460 square meters, assembled a team of dozens of 3D artists, engineers, and researchers (even including a former Boeing engineer), invited Carolyn Christov-Bakargiev, the former director of the Castello di Rivoli Museum of Contemporary Art, as an advisor, continuously exhibited at art shows around the globe, and created new artworks.

This exhibition of Beeple's robot dogs has not only gained attention in the crypto circle due to its price but has also been covered by traditional media like the WSJ.

Perguntas relacionadas

QWho is the artist that sold an NFT for $69 million four years ago?

ABeeple.

QWhat is the name of the new NFT project Beeple launched at the Art Basel exhibition?

ARegular Animals.

QHow many Regular Animals NFTs were given away for free at Art Basel, and what was their estimated total value based on secondary market sales?

A256 NFTs were given away, with an estimated total value of nearly $9 million based on sales of over 10 ETH (approx. $35,000) each.

QWhat unique feature do the Regular Animals robot dogs have that allows them to create art?

AThey use cameras in their heads to observe their surroundings and a continuously evolving visual algorithm to create artworks.

QBesides the NFT collection, how many physical pieces are in the Regular Animals series, and what was one listed price for a physical piece on eBay?

AThere are 1024 physical pieces, and one was listed for sale on eBay at a fixed price of $6,500.

Leituras Relacionadas

"AI Burning Books" Is Actually a Misunderstanding

"AI Book-Burning" Is Actually a Misunderstanding Recent reports about AI companies purchasing used books, scanning them, and then destroying the physical copies have sparked widespread outrage. Terms like "AI is devouring human knowledge" have become common, fueled by dramatic visuals of books being cut and shredded. However, the actual facts reveal a more nuanced story. While companies like Anthropic have indeed spent millions to buy and "destructively scan" several million books for AI training, this volume is a small fraction of the global second-hand book market. The core act—digitizing content and then discarding the physical object—is the opposite of historical book-burning, which aimed to erase knowledge. A key point of contention is the purchase of rare or out-of-print books. Yet, if these books were legally for sale on the open market, the buyer (whether an AI firm or an individual) has the right to do with them as they wish. The real question is whether society has adequate systems to protect books of genuine cultural heritage *before* they are sold. Expecting profit-driven companies to self-regulate on this is unreliable; the solution lies in establishing public rules, such as protected lists for rare editions or granting libraries priority purchase rights. Much of the intense public reaction stems not from the scale of actual harm, but from the powerful symbolism. The image of books being fed into machines taps into deeper anxieties about AI: fears of job displacement, mistrust of tech giants, and the unsettling feeling that humanity is feeding its own cultural past to the systems that might replace it. The outrage over "AI book-burning" is thus less about the physical books and more a proxy for broader societal tensions surrounding artificial intelligence.

marsbitHá 2m

"AI Burning Books" Is Actually a Misunderstanding

marsbitHá 2m

Robinhood CEO named three benefits of tokenized stocks for American investors

Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev advocates for the U.S. to allow trading of tokenized stocks domestically. He argues this model could modernize the financial system through three key benefits: **faster, near real-time settlements** reducing counterparty risk and broker capital requirements; **24/7 trading** enabling reaction to market events anytime; and **greater asset portability**, allowing tokens to be moved between platforms and held in self-custody wallets, increasing competition among services. Tenev emphasized tokenization is about rebuilding asset ownership infrastructure for freer movement, similar to information online. He highlighted potential integration with DeFi, where tokenized stocks could be used for lending or as collateral. Currently, Robinhood's stock tokens are not direct ownership of the underlying securities but are backed by them and provide access to economic value like dividends; their structure may evolve with future regulations. Tenev identified outdated securities laws and market infrastructure, developed over a century, as the main U.S. obstacle, urging regulators to adapt rules for blockchain while preserving investor protections. He warned it would be strange if the rest of the world could build the future of ownership around U.S. assets while Americans are left behind, suggesting tokenization could later expand to private company shares and other illiquid assets.

cryptonews.ruHá 23m

Robinhood CEO named three benefits of tokenized stocks for American investors

cryptonews.ruHá 23m

Trading

Spot
活动图片