If you enjoy this post, please retweet it.
Wut?
The New York Times, among many others, reports that a piece of (for lack of a better term) static art that exists only digitally was sold for $69,000,000. The article dares to mention the artist responsible for my favorite painting in comparison. By clicking through to the Christie’s site, you can view the art, and thereby take ownership of it for no charge.
Wut?
Follow me on Twitter @gsllc
Follow the New York Times @nytimes
Play What You Want 
The important thing is, that $69 million couldn’t possibly have been spent in better ways.
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 6:35 PM Frylock’s Geekery wrote:
> Frylock posted: ” If you enjoy this post, please retweet it. Wut? The New > York Times, among many others, reports that a piece of (for lack of a > better term) static art that exists only digitally was sold for > $69,000,000. The article dares to mention the artist respo” >
LikeLike