I feel like in these conversations about crypto that people use the following terms somewhat interchangeably:
- Coin
- Token
- NFT
- Transaction
- Smart contract
Is there some place with a concise definition of each of these terms?
NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
711–720 of 786 posts
Re: NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
#712Earlier quoted context omitted.
NFTs are the orginal NFTs
The equivalent of painting reproductions with unique IDs on the back. The whole things feels like a scam to me. Taking the best part about digital goods (that they’re non-rival) and attempting to hack on scarcity for the purpose of exploiting a psychological flaw.
I used to hate veblen goods, until I learned to appreciate the "fool and his money" aspect. Now when I see some $100k handbag I'm glad that person gave away a bunch of actual societal influence (money) for a bit of temporary status.
Re: NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
#713Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a difference if the author of the art is the one that minted the NFT. It's like jack dorsey selling an NFT of the first tweet compared with any random person trying to do the same.
What rights do you actually have in a tweet? Which of those rights are actually transferable? What rights do you have in a tweet that you made in your capacity as an employee of a company? What rights do twitter as a company have with respect to tweets? Or to impose restrictions on the ability of people to transfer rights with respect to tweets?
Right. This is an example of the dumbest kind of NFT. It's not even a signed original, it's just a token that says "You own the thing!" but for a resource that anyone could download anyway and ownership isn't tied to use or display. It's about what I expect from Jack.
At least with cryptokitties, love em or hate em, the NFT was the character and the permission, so while anyone could admire your cat nobody but you could publish actions from it.
Re: NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
#714Earlier quoted context omitted.
The example you give - reselling tickets, is actually something that is directly something ticket sellers want to discourage, crypto doesn’t solve that.
Why would that be so? My understanding is that they want to discourage scalping. Digital tickets tied to digital identities that can only be transfered at market price. That's not a difficult smart contact to create.
I like the idea of building in a percent cut taken out of the resell price and given to the venue/artist. It taxes scalpers and allows artists to benefit from secondary markets if they mispriced their initial offering. Its also easy to do in a contract
Re: NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
#715Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also if anything is a digital beanie baby then so is Bitcoin, what’s the difference?
There’s a limited supply of Bitcoin
But there's no limited supply of digital coins. I could make one right now, and owning Bitcoin is no different from owning my one except that speculators place more value on Bitcoin than my unknown currency. Everything Seth said about NFTs is true for all crypto coins.
Re: NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
#716Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also if anything is a digital beanie baby then so is Bitcoin, what’s the difference?
It is permissionless. You can transfer BTC without a bank or eBay or the postal service being involved. It is the best way to buy LSD from a stranger. So it has some value because of that. Similar to rare wine, most of the price is due today to speculation and asset diversification, and rich hobbiests.
You can transfer an NFT to someone else exactly the same. It's just that someone has made a real world distinction between 2 distinct NFTs, like if someone found that a particular coin's hash spelled out "Jesus will rise again" in base64.
I agree re: rare wine and rich hobbyists. Bitcoin's value is much the same, although without the wine.
Everything Seth is saying about NFTs is true for every crypto coin.
Re: NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
#717Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>If you skip verification, you open yourself up to bad actors feeding you a bogus header - and you only figure that out after being drip fed a bunch of transactions that don't match the merkle root. Malicious actors can't give a bogus header, because you can verify the bogus header doesn't have enough PoW. If the malicious actor does produce sufficient PoW for their bogus header, they are foregoing massive block rew…
> Malicious actors can't give a bogus header, because you can verify the bogus header doesn't have enough PoW. Ok, I guess you don't know how verification works. Here are the 19 steps: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_rules#.22block.22_messag... Step 4) "Block hash must satisfy claimed nBits proof of work" The bad actor has full control of that, he just has to make sure the fake header has enough leading 0s in pho…
That doesn't adrress my point at all. You can verify the requisite proof of work was done just by hashing the data in the block header to see if it meets the difficulty requirement.
The malicious actor cannot fake that. They have to produce massive amounts of proof of work to find a value in the nonce data field in the block header that results in that hash meeting the required difficulty, and even if the malicious actor delays transmitting the whole block, they cannot delay transmitting the block header, or other nodes will not even bother trying to extend their block.
So all miners can immediately verify if the block headers they are receiving have the required PoW behind them, and it would be very costly for a malicious actor to generate fake block headers with enough PoW to be accepted, while giving the malicious actor very little advantage in an attack, meaning it would be a completely impractical and ineffective way to attack way to attack Bitcoin.
Re: NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
#718Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should also account for how early NFTs are. If you've been following blockchains for a while, you may recall that in 2012 and 2013 there were an ocean of Bitcoin knock offs that distinguished themselves by changing things like the difficulty adjustment algorithm, or the hashing function, or the total coin supply. All of these "altcoins" to experts seemed to be completely useless and many chalked the entire catego…
I feel your take is the correct one. I'm old enough to remember when home video recorders were criticized because porn, but porn was just the kick off to the wider world of video uses and purposes.
That comparison is really the opposite, the open question on the morality of porn does nothing to damage the usefulness of home video recorders.
On the other hand, the morality of NFT's is already mainstream while the usefulness is an open question that's leaning toward "not really".
Re: NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
#719Earlier quoted context omitted.
NFTs are nonsense and just as much a pyramid scheme as everything else crypto. People will get left holding the bag at the top just like with CryptoKitties. I have several hand painted reproductions of famous paintings (impressionist). I get just as much enjoyment looking at them on my wall as I have at the museums looking at the real ones. I don't need to have $100M. I'm glad that content creators are getting paid n…
I’m skeptical about NFTs too but trying to keep an open mind, because at the end of the day, while you or I personally don’t need the 100M to enjoy the impressionist art, you can’t ignore the fact that someone out there is in fact willing to pay that for the original. And that’s kind of the same weird authenticity bragging rights situation.
I think art is different in some ways though. Far be it from me to tell others how to spend their money, but at least with physical art it is preserved. The art may mostly be traded by the ultra-wealthy, but at least it still exists for the good of society.
An NFT is really just a digital autograph. Not even really an autograph, isn't it a cryptographic signature? Which would surely need to be random by nature, so the artist can't even do something unique with that. It's external to the work itself.
Re: NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
#720Earlier quoted context omitted.
Congratulations, you just invented an inefficient PoS for a single use case!
The point being made is that it's trivial to create a proof of ownership system without using the blockchain.
The proof of ownership system described above is a blockchain where every single block is produced at irregular timestamp and contain a single transaction.