Sincere question: is there any evidence that people want to "own" digital art, i.e. with a record on a blockchain? I'm not necessarily skeptical, just curious to know if there is like… a data point…?

*keeping in mind such "ownership" doesn't prevent other people from copying or even publishing the art, but rather just asserts "this particular grid of pixels (or sequence of samples, characters, etc.) is owned by Sloanius J. Artbuyer"

**one of the things that's odd, for me, is the fact that—in many implementations—you could change one pixel (or one sample, one character, etc.) in a work of art and happily "own" your ~identical version on the blockchain.

***that's actually a profound argument: "a work of digital art is a specific sequence of bytes." Is it though?? I might argue that jolene.mp3 with one bit flipped is, in fact, still jolene.mp3! In fact, it's the same as jolene.wav, too. So… hmm