Earlier quoted context omitted.
Once again I disagree.. these "some people" need to be the majority(of anyone participating in these currencies) for this mining to stay profitable.. Of course i may be mistaken about that part of the reasoning, but I'm fairly confident about it. Please let me know if you think it is an unfair assumption.
Majority is counted by hashing capability, not by head count. Is it not?
NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
771–780 of 786 posts
Re: NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
#772Earlier quoted context omitted.
When it's owned by an external party, you might not be able to (easily) trade it. When it's decentralized, nobody can stop you from trading it.
But of course there’s only one place you can redeem them. That means either that party is ok with transfers (in which case your point is moot because they can offer that themselves like Ticketmaster does) - or they’re not ok with the transfer in which case they won’t honor the token, making your point moot.
Re: NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
#773Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? Trading histories for NFTs are usually fully public. There are so many other things like ponzi smart contracts that move millions every day that using NFTs doesnt sound so appealing
1. Buy NFT with clean funds 2. Bid 10-100x price on NFT with dirty funds, buy it 3. Clean fund account gets a big multiplier on funds in a "clean" way
Re: NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
#774Earlier quoted context omitted.
> a usecase can exist outside of the law So, let me get this straight: you have an NFT that represents the deed for a vehicle, but the law does not recognize the NFT as the deed for the vehicle... if you don't see any problems with that, boy do I have a bridge to sell you.
Let me reprharse this. You have a piece of paper that represents the deed for a vehicle, but the law doesn't recognize the "paper" as the deed for the vehicle...(this during the time of clay tablets) Was that clear? or do you still have that bridge for sale?
Re: NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
#775NFTs make perfect sense for representing a claim on things that can be used, like event tickets or in-game virtual goods. But as certificates layered on top of collectibles... I'm not so sure. With something like CryptoKitties, you can do something with the tokens (play a virtual pet game). But with something like CryptoPunks you're essentially paying for digital beanie babies, which are worse than real ones since an…
In real life, people wear rolexes. Why? You and I both know that a casio can tell time just as well as a Rolex. I don't know the difference between one model of Rolex from another, but some may cost 10k and some may cost 20k.
To those deep in the Rolex world, the difference is huge. They can tell right away.
Why do people wear rolexes? A casio is lighter and easier to tell time. But a Rolex. That's status. You're not SAYING you're rich, but you signal you're rich. Big difference. The former, people will scoff at. The latter, people may be impressed. And if you're in the Rolex world and you own the top of the line Rolex? Those in the know are even more impressed.
How does this translate online? How can you signal status online? In centralized systems like twitter, you just look at followers. But what if... you just now made a twitter account to talk about something you love, and you have no followers? How can you signal status to people you talk to that you deserve some clout?
Enter something like cryptopunks. People in the cryptospace use cryptopunks as their twitter pic. Those in the know realize that one cryptopunk does not equal another cryptopunk. Maybe yours has red hair and only 2 percent of cryptopunks have red hair. Maybe you know all red hair cryptopunks command a huge premium and cost tens of thousands of dollars.
They can verify in your wallet that you own that crypto punk.
You can move from one platform to another, with no followers, and suddenly, you have digital clout.
Mull it over for awhile.
Re: NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
#776NFTs make perfect sense for representing a claim on things that can be used, like event tickets or in-game virtual goods. But as certificates layered on top of collectibles... I'm not so sure. With something like CryptoKitties, you can do something with the tokens (play a virtual pet game). But with something like CryptoPunks you're essentially paying for digital beanie babies, which are worse than real ones since an…
> NFTs make perfect sense for representing a claim on things that can be used, like event tickets or in-game virtual goods. There’s absolutely no reason for that to be decentralized, only one party can honor the tokens anyways. Like most things crypto they don’t actually make sense for anything.
Mark Cuban talks about this regarding dallas mavericks tickets. Suddenly the ticket creator can still benefit from scalpers buying everything. Or, you can set the next sell price to be limited to only 10 percent more. etc.
There is a reason for artists and musicians to move to NFTs as well, as royalty is built in. See kings of leon releasing their album as an NFT.
Re: NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
#777Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m sure Vitalik will deliver we just have to wait (skeleton meme). That is to say I’ll believe it when I see it.
What hasn't he delivered on? Does he have any track record of delivering what's been promised? If I recall correctly, proof of stake already started to roll out this year.
Re: NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
#778Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except it is different in a way. Owning a physical autograph is different from owning a picture of one; the physical autograph can't be reproduced and has value due to its uniqueness and to its physical existence. It would instead be like owning a unique piece of paper with a unique number on it, which somehow corresponded to a picture of the autograph. Now the autograph portion is identical between you and anyone el…
The NFT is cryptographically signed by the author. You can't forge it, and it's publicly, verifiably linked to the author. It's even better than a physical autograph.
Re: NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
#779Earlier quoted context omitted.
A new medium requires reinventing and making explicit "real world" constructs. The article rejects anything worse than the best part of current systems without making clear the explicit tradeoffs. I could retort and point to companies actually using blockchain but you can easily argue flaws in their implementation. A "real world use case" is not well defined.
> The article rejects anything worse than the best part of current systems For a technology that's frequently hailed as the best new thing since sliced bread, it's quite telling that it can't exhibit a single of the best parts of current systems. And it's replete with parts that are worse than even the worst parts of the current systems. > I could retort and point to companies actually using blockchain but you can ea…
Their use of consensus mechanisms make what was implicit explicit. Their global nature is truly without borders. Specific cryptocurrencies are mathematically private and more censorship resistant.
Blockchain for the most part isn't ready for the vast majority of people, but discounting it entirely seems like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Not everything needs blockchain but for the things that do they really do.
Real world companies also make tradeoffs, often a single point of trust (the company) and implicit assumptions or state.
The current systems that work are great and I don't want to dismiss them at all, but there are specific cryptocurrencies that currently serve some specific needs better. In future I'd imagine there are other ways to take advantage of DHT to serve even more needs better.
Re: NFTs Are a Dangerous Trap
#780Earlier quoted context omitted.
What hasn't he delivered on? Does he have any track record of delivering what's been promised? If I recall correctly, proof of stake already started to roll out this year.
To date? A scalable payment network with low transaction fees and a small environmental footprint.