Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cryptography experts trash NFTs on first day of RSA Conference

mashable.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 200 posts

Re: Cryptography experts trash NFTs on first day of RSA Conference

#121

Post by btilly »

echelon wrote: post #63
dschnurr wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The creator is almost always the artist. Provenance is what gives NFTs their value. The value of a Beeple NFT minted by a random user is $0.

The value of a Beeple NFT minted by Beeple is $0. The market just hasn't discovered that yet. An NFT has no more value than a JPG. I'll longbets anyone that says otherwise.

Let me guess, you're over 40?

The following Douglas Adams quote sums it up perfectly: Anything that's invented between when you're fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.

NFTs were invented in 2017. So if you're over 40, it is against the natural order of things.

But the idea of limited edition signed original has long been a thing in the art world. Given the fact that offline signed original prints have maintained long-term value, I see no reason why online versions with more provable provenance would not as well.

Re: Cryptography experts trash NFTs on first day of RSA Conference

#122

Post by th0ma5 »

intotheabyss wrote: post #120
th0ma5 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, and Ethereum is effectively centralized https://web.archive.org/web/20201214170136if_/https://www.re...

You can't be serious with that link? That entire subreddit was run by one person who clearly had a mental health disorder. I remember that person very well. edit: I'm not arguing every single point here because a lot of them aren't even relevant anymore, and frankly I just don't care enough to go through them with you. I'm not trying to win an argument. The information is freely available for all to see and people ca…

That's not an argument against their points

Edit reply: you actually don't have any argument, I guess then why post? Ad hominem isn't very useful nor informative, especially without any citations

Re: Cryptography experts trash NFTs on first day of RSA Conference

#123

Post by amackera »

singold wrote: post #93

What I dont understand is what stops you from minting the same thing on multiple NFT blockchains and why is it any diferent than something centralized, and thats why I dont like all the NFT hype (I may be dumb and dont get what NFTs really are)

What's stopping you from taking a picture of a painting and hanging the painting in your house?

There's nothing stopping you, but your print is worthless and the original is valuable.

The fact that the NFTs use the ETH blockchain makes it decentralized. A single authority issuing NFTs would be centralized.

Re: Cryptography experts trash NFTs on first day of RSA Conference

#124

Post by amackera »

Trias11 wrote: post #8

I totally agree. Tulips was the first thing that came to my mind as well. However as a technology NFT has it place, especially when crypto ecosystem evolves beyond ETH limitations

Tulips bulbs are more-or-less fungible; but I guess you're thinking of tulips because of the speculative nature of these assets?

Re: Cryptography experts trash NFTs on first day of RSA Conference

#125

Post by btilly »

pmulard wrote: post #78
AlexandrB wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What stops a record company from including a clause assigning any NFTs (and/or the revenue therefrom) created by the artist during the contract term to them?

Nothing. Just like nothing stopped Taylor Swift from rerecording her entire library to license her music herself. If artists sign their NFT rights away, that's on them.

What Taylor Swift did is an imitation of what Prince did long before her.

See https://www.billboard.com/articles/news/cover-story/7348551/... for more.

Re: Cryptography experts trash NFTs on first day of RSA Conference

#126

Post by saalweachter »

echelon wrote: post #74
berberous wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would take a broader bet that is not tied to Beeple (i.e. that NFTs of significant artists will have long-term value in a similar manner as a painting).

I would take that broader bet that NFTs will have zero long-term value.

I'm not interested in taking the counter party in this bet, but if you were to take a bet in the form "The highest sale price of a NFT in calendar year 20X0 will be no more Y0% of the highest sale price of a postage stamp in that same year.", what would you fill in for X & Y?

Re: Cryptography experts trash NFTs on first day of RSA Conference

#127

Post by wrkronmiller »

reedjosh wrote: post #43
mumblemumble wrote: post #42

The tulip comparison strikes me as being rather specious. For starters, tulip bulbs of the same variety were absolutely fungible. It's more like trading cards. If you own some rare rookie card, you don't actually own that baseball player, just a sort of paper token that references the baseball player. But, since people see value in the reference itself, the value of the token ends up deriving from both the player's c…

NFTs for MTG would make a lot of sense. Right now it's kinda like that, but there's a market on MTG servers.

Are we about to come full circle to Mt Gox?

Re: Cryptography experts trash NFTs on first day of RSA Conference

#128

Post by singold »

amackera wrote: post #123
singold wrote: post #93

What I dont understand is what stops you from minting the same thing on multiple NFT blockchains and why is it any diferent than something centralized, and thats why I dont like all the NFT hype (I may be dumb and dont get what NFTs really are)

What's stopping you from taking a picture of a painting and hanging the painting in your house? There's nothing stopping you, but your print is worthless and the original is valuable. The fact that the NFTs use the ETH blockchain makes it decentralized. A single authority issuing NFTs would be centralized.

I understand the decentralized nature of the blockchain, but couldnt I mint the same painting on multiple blockchains?

I'm not an expert, but I can see the value on cryptocurrencies and ETH and all the smart contract tech. But I can't see the same value on NFTs, as more than speculation.

Re: Cryptography experts trash NFTs on first day of RSA Conference

#129

Post by reedjosh »

wrkronmiller wrote: post #127
reedjosh wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NFTs for MTG would make a lot of sense. Right now it's kinda like that, but there's a market on MTG servers.

Are we about to come full circle to Mt Gox?

Magic the Gathering...

Re: Cryptography experts trash NFTs on first day of RSA Conference

#130

Post by singold »

intotheabyss wrote: post #109
singold wrote: post #93

What I dont understand is what stops you from minting the same thing on multiple NFT blockchains and why is it any diferent than something centralized, and thats why I dont like all the NFT hype (I may be dumb and dont get what NFTs really are)

Because the NFT is only as good as the blockchain it was minted on. The vast majority of (valuable) NFTs are minted on Ethereum. If someone mints the same NFT on Flow for example, it won't be as valuable because it's a copy (verifiably so) and it's secured by a centralized chain. NFTs are supposed to live on as if they were physical objects, so minting an NFT on a centralized chain has a significant risk of not exist…

I get the difference between different blockchains, but what I can't see is what value I get when I buy an NFT. As I see it I only get the brag rights of "owning" something on some blockchain and the posibility of reselling that right.

But I may be missing something

Post reply on HN