An NFT That Saves Lives • Hacker News Board

Re: An NFT That Saves Lives

#111

Post by kemonocode » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:08 PM UTC

graeme wrote: post #75

lynx234 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One part I’m unclear on: if someone outbids him, do only they get the token and pg pays nothing, or do both pay and are the contributions etched into the NFT? No, only the person who wins the bid gets the token. I typically defend the tech behind NFTs but this just seems like it's riding the hype of NFTs more than anything.

And if someone else bids more, is that the only money that goes to Noora? i.e. PG’s bid is voided

Yes, only the winning bid would go to Noora. However, there would be a record of any other bidders' intent.

With a bit more of creativity/effort, someone could have created a smart contract for keeping track of all the donations and only releasing them once they reach a certain threshold, then giving a token back representing a "life saved" to donors if they truly wanted, but I get capitalizing on NFTs' hype right now.

Re: An NFT That Saves Lives

#112

Post by bob33212 » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:11 PM UTC

graeme wrote: post #97

brown9-2 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I had hoped PG would write an essay on crypto/NFTs, as he seems enthused by them and is good at explaining things. What is there to explain? People who are invested in cryptocurrencies are hyping the equivalent of digital trading cards because it has the downstream effect of increasing the hype on cryptocurrency.

I don’t know what there is to explain, but I’m always open to the possibility that I’ve missed something. Ethereum, in particular, is at least capable of interesting things. That doesn’t mean it will change the world. But I’m always interested in hearing from intelligent people who differ on why they think it will.

I appreciate this as I'm also trying to keep an open mind and understand what this means for the future.

So far there are only two arguments that I understand:

1. Libertarianism: The world will be better if we remove the government and other 3rd parties from interfering in transactions between individuals.

2. Decentralization of Money (Crypto), like the decentralization of information (The internet) will unlock technologies and opportunities that we cannot appreciate now.

Those are logical arguments, but I'm still missing the "so what" answer. How does the lack of government oversight change my life? My next bank account may be decentralized, so what? Does that mean I get better service? Lower Fees?

I understand that plenty of people were unimpressed with the internet when it first came out, but I was not one of those people. I got it and was online in 1995, I bought GOOG in 2005, and TSLA in 2014. So I'm not your typical technological naysayer. Maybe Bitcoin isn't just an accidental Ponzi scheme, but as far as I can tell that is what it will be when we look back in 10 years.

Re: An NFT That Saves Lives

#113

Post by lucasnortj » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:11 PM UTC

NFTs are idiotic, an NFT in the service of a worthy goal is no less pointless nor idiotic

Re: An NFT That Saves Lives

#114

Post by ASpaceCowboi » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:17 PM UTC

Maybe i'm just an idiot, but this:

>For this NFT, they're going to issue a public report tracking how this specific tranche of money is spent, and estimating the number of lives saved as a result.

In my opinion, that is vital.

Many donations to non-profits are used for many various reasons (some justifiable, some definitely NOT).

This actually allows tracking on that money. So isn't this a good thing? People can easily manipulate stats on documents without having to worry about someone else double checking the work.

With the ability to track the NFT's currency transactions is good, no?

Re: An NFT That Saves Lives

#115

Post by eloff » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:18 PM UTC

endisneigh wrote: post #26

eloff wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The environmental harm of a single ethereum transaction is very low. Lower than a fundraising dinner. Please take your nitpicking elsewhere. They're literally aiming at saving thousands of lives and the comments are all focused on how bad NFTs are. Give me a break, talk about missing the point.

> The environmental harm of a single ethereum transaction is very low. Lower than a fundraising dinner. Please take your nitpicking elsewhere. Source? I'm curious to see exactly how the environmental harm of a fundraising dinner is quantified. edit: When I google "ethereum transaction energy cost" the Google featured snippet says 50kwH for a single transaction. I find it hard to believe that it would take 50kWH to co…

Think about all the energy costs involved in everyone driving to the dinner, the air conditioning or heating for the venue, etc. It would depend on the number of guests which is more costly to the environment. For a dinner where you aim to raise 2.5 million, I think the dinner is going to have a bigger impact.

But again, I want to reiterate that focusing on the environmental impact here is totally missing the point. It's like saying the outside of the hospital is painted a jarring color.

Re: An NFT That Saves Lives

#116

Post by elliekelly » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:19 PM UTC

lolsal wrote: post #42

Isn't this just a receipt? like when I donate shirts to goodwill?

Yes. Except this way you get to pretend your receipt for money given away (ostensibly out of the kindness of your heart) has magically become an “asset”.

Re: An NFT That Saves Lives

#117

Post by eloff » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:23 PM UTC

rpearl wrote: post #76

eloff wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The environmental harm of a single ethereum transaction is very low. Lower than a fundraising dinner. Please take your nitpicking elsewhere. They're literally aiming at saving thousands of lives and the comments are all focused on how bad NFTs are. Give me a break, talk about missing the point.

Because doing this as an NFT is utterly nonsensical. The NFT is involved for absolutely no reason. The only results of involving an NFT are (1) legitimizing a ridiculous scam and (2) causing extra environmental damage alongside the donation. Just donate the money, using a fraction of the carbon cost, and if you want to generate hype, do a match. What a waste of time and energy.

They clearly did it to capitalize on the hype around NFTs and draw attention to the fund raising event. Given we're talking about it, that looks successful, not nonsensical. Welcome to the world of marketing.

Re: An NFT That Saves Lives

#118

Post by elliekelly » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:24 PM UTC

ASpaceCowboi wrote: post #114

Maybe i'm just an idiot, but this: >For this NFT, they're going to issue a public report tracking how this specific tranche of money is spent, and estimating the number of lives saved as a result. In my opinion, that is vital. Many donations to non-profits are used for many various reasons (some justifiable, some definitely NOT). This actually allows tracking on that money. So isn't this a good thing? People can easi…

> People can easily manipulate stats on documents without having to worry about someone else double checking the work.

Perhaps I’m misunderstanding how this all works. How is the “report” that will be issued any different from a regular document? Just because it will be an NFT doesn’t mean it will be more accurate does it? Someone will still write whatever they want on the document itself and there’s no mechanism that will make this document more accurate than any other document.

Re: An NFT That Saves Lives

#119

Post by endisneigh » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:25 PM UTC

eloff wrote: post #115

endisneigh wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The environmental harm of a single ethereum transaction is very low. Lower than a fundraising dinner. Please take your nitpicking elsewhere. Source? I'm curious to see exactly how the environmental harm of a fundraising dinner is quantified. edit: When I google "ethereum transaction energy cost" the Google featured snippet says 50kwH for a single transaction. I find it hard to believe that it would take 50kWH to co…

Think about all the energy costs involved in everyone driving to the dinner, the air conditioning or heating for the venue, etc. It would depend on the number of guests which is more costly to the environment. For a dinner where you aim to raise 2.5 million, I think the dinner is going to have a bigger impact. But again, I want to reiterate that focusing on the environmental impact here is totally missing the point.…

this is a really disingenuous comparison. again you'd have to subtract the costs that would've already been incurred anyway. would someone invited to a fundraiser dinner not eat otherwise? or drive? or have AC?

also, given that it's already very easy to send money to any non-profit talking about the potentially unnecessary environment costs doesn't seem unreasonable. the only reason people bring it up is because there's an alternative that doesn't incur the same costs but achieve the same thing.

Re: An NFT That Saves Lives

#120

Post by [deleted] » Tue, May 04, 2021, 5:26 PM UTC

mannykannot wrote: post #93

hoppyhoppy2 wrote: post #6

Has Mr. Graham done an honest calculation of how many lives will be lost to the environmental impacts of NFTs if they become mainstream?

I don't think Mr. Graham is under any moral obligation to consider this issue unless it remotely plausible that NFTs issued for charitable purposes (or just NFTs, period) will "go mainstream" to the extent that they have any noticable environmental impact.

[deleted]