I agree with what Lois Evans said in terms of temporality. I think she is referring to this specific artwork, not NFTs as a general thing. I think NFTs are here to stay- I mean look at all galleries and art institutions that are adopting this new digital era. And as you said MattDiLucca , NFTs and digital art have been around for decades. The first digital artworks probably date back to the '50s or '60s so why are galleries/art institutions dedicating a space for digital art just NOW? Digital art is not new but this new commodity (NFTs) are new to the art world and I think that's why NFTs are kind of important. NFTs are giving value to the digital and making people more interested in it. So, are we witnessing a new art era? No, I don't think so. Nothing is new. The only novelty is the way we trade it and that has nothing to do with art. 

Thou, I think it is a bit dangerous to attributing these high prices to digital art. But of course, this Hirst piece is a whole new game - literally. And that's why it is so intriguing. If you questioned me: is this Hirst piece a game-changer for the traditional Fine Art market? Yes! It is a blend of traditional with the digital- the perfect way to challenge people to enter a world they find intimidating.