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

Charlie Bit My Finger video to be taken off YouTube after selling for £500k

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 270 posts

Re: Charlie Bit My Finger video to be taken off YouTube after selling for £500k

#2

Post by flowerlad »

NFTs may be a way for open source developers to make some money off of their work. Linus Torvalds could make a few hundred millions by selling an NFT for Linux, considering a JPG file sold for $69 million [1].

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/11/arts/design/nft-auction-c...

Re: Charlie Bit My Finger video to be taken off YouTube after selling for £500k

#6

Post by dlevine »

This is potentially the beginning of a very interesting trend, and something I have spent some time thinking about. My sense is that owning an NFT should allow you to control access to that content (even if your choice is just to make it publicly accessible). NFT doesn't have an ACL layer built in, so this would need to be added (has anyone already done this?)

One open question is whether it actually makes sense to have an ACL for an electronic asset, because once someone has access to it, they can easily make a perfect copy of the bits and give it to anyone they want. But I guess you could make the same argument about selling access to digital content that is available on a torrent somewhere.

Re: Charlie Bit My Finger video to be taken off YouTube after selling for £500k

#7

Post by wearywanderer »

flowerlad wrote: post #2

NFTs may be a way for open source developers to make some money off of their work. Linus Torvalds could make a few hundred millions by selling an NFT for Linux, considering a JPG file sold for $69 million [1]. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/11/arts/design/nft-auction-c...

Sex work is less tarnishing to one's personal reputation than NFT scams. There is more honor in sucking dick for crack rocks.

Re: Charlie Bit My Finger video to be taken off YouTube after selling for £500k

#9

Post by librish »

I don't have any problems with people buying or selling art for large sums of money, nor do I have a problem with people classifying art as pretty much whatever they want.

The only thing I mind are the people pretending a real problem has been solved with NFTs. In any current (or conceived as far as I know) implementation of NFTs you have to trust so many people, technologies, and companies that the blockchain being technically "trustless" is not solving a real problem at all.

Overall I don't understand the point of a blockchain if you have to interact with anything off-chain at all. If I have to trust an oracle or similar why even bother with a blockchain in the first place?

Post reply on HN