amok: you can claim a lot about NFT's, but anti-consumerist is not one of them. you could actualy do the argument of the opposit - NFT's as a symptom of hyper-cosnumerism. As NFT's are trades in digtial and non-existing entities, there is nothing in them stopping people using digital goods at all. ownership of an NFT have no impact on how the assets is used (or not used), so they cannot be anti-consumerist.
Respectfully, what kind of argument is this? By your logic, one could argue that something like "microtransactions to speed up timers" aren't anti-consumer, they're actually a symptom of hyper-consumerism. And maybe you would agree with that, at which point I would say this is a definitional issue. I am not locked in to the term "anti-consumer" necessarily, but what I mean by it is to point out a practice that is bad for some or all consumers, if not in the short term then at least certainly in the long term. In fact my comment that you replied to gave an example of this:
rjbuffchix: People should be discouraged from throwing their money into this because it provides data for the companies to inevitably spin in their favor ("see, people accept NFTs! Please enjoy our future projects, which consist solely of NFTs").
We have seen various gaming companies go down such paths to where they now: only make mobile games, or only make DRMed games, or only make online DRMed games, or only make pachinko machines, etc.