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

I made $50K in three days with NFTs

paulstamatiou.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 86 posts

Re: I made $50K in three days with NFTs

#21

Post by MereInterest »

Dwolb wrote: post #15
gjsman-1000 wrote: post #3

I am calling it now: that blockchain royalty system on NFTs? It is only a matter of time before Hollywood makes NFTs interact with DRM. Your movie purchase will be an NFT with hardware-backed chain verification.

Mila Kunis has an NFT project where only token holders can view the associated episodes of a cartoon and upon NFT resale, a percent of the proceeds gets remitted back to the project creators [1]. [1] https://www.vice.com/en/article/k78kay/mila-kunis-stoner-cat...

> upon NFT resale, a percent of the proceeds gets remitted back to the project creators

I'd rather have more ways to restore the First Sale Doctrine for digital goods, rather than debasing it further.

Re: I made $50K in three days with NFTs

#22

Post by RupertWiser »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #3

I am calling it now: that blockchain royalty system on NFTs? It is only a matter of time before Hollywood makes NFTs interact with DRM. Your movie purchase will be an NFT with hardware-backed chain verification.

What’s the purpose? You still need a centralised store for your unencrypted video. Why would this be preferable to having a database?

Re: I made $50K in three days with NFTs

#25

Post by jeroenhd »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #3

I am calling it now: that blockchain royalty system on NFTs? It is only a matter of time before Hollywood makes NFTs interact with DRM. Your movie purchase will be an NFT with hardware-backed chain verification.

They could, but why would they? Right now, they can lock content behind a subscription, remove listed content, edit and re-release content, and pretty much do whatever they want. You don't buy a movie, you buy the limited right to watch what goes as the current iteration of a video file for a certain amount of time. You can't resell your purchase, so everyone has to pay full price to the sellers.

Using NFTs or other cryptographic DRM would be hugely beneficial to consumers, but what's the point of helping the consumers? It'll only cut into costs because NFTs require some kind of cryptocoin network to do a bunch of calculations, which is expensive to run and wastes enormous amounts of electricity.

A simple RSA signature could be used to license a file to your computer and some DRM comes pretty close to that. If the industry wanted to give you ownership, they already could've done it before the NFT speculators set up the current hype.

Re: I made $50K in three days with NFTs

#26

Post by rubyn00bie »

I just think it’s a way for people to show off their wealth. An NFT is pretty much a joke, “here’s the original” doesn’t really mean shit when I can quite literally have an exact and indistinguishable copy of the work. It honestly feels like insanity to me. Like, I can right now go set my avatar to the exact same Ape picture Curry purchased. It’s not even a replica, or recreation, it is literally the same exact image.

The only real world analogy we kind of have is if we could freely “duplicate” physical goods with the press of a button. Would the Mona Lisa be valuable if DaVinci could have made 1000s of EXACT copies? I’m gonna say no, but that’s exactly where we are. It’s cute someone says they own something like an NFT, or that it’s the original, but it’s nothing more than an illusion of uniqueness.

Edited: slight wording tweak for clarity.

Re: I made $50K in three days with NFTs

#29

Post by adnzzzzZ »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #14
HPsquared wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the NFTs could be bought and sold, this would finally allow a decentralized secondary market for DRM media.

I... don't like where those ideas are going. At this point I long for pre-Internet days, where physical media (tapes, CDs, books) achieved the same goal while wasting much less resources than it takes to keep the blockchain that would support the NFTs. I also think that anything that further solidifies IP enforcement is going to kill the future. Consider that one of these days, we might progress enough to be able to…

Artists directly making money from their art without intermediaries taking huge cuts (and with resales giving them a percentage on top of it) is absolutely not going to kill the future, it's just going to incentivize better creation of art. Scarcity makes economic sense for various kinds of art and there are many fields that have been destroyed by the Internet (i.e. music). It's only natural for the solution to also come from it in this manner.

Re: I made $50K in three days with NFTs

#30

Post by blue_rog »

teruakohatu wrote: post #6

I think the vast majority of people selling NFTs are not recouping their listing fees.

Although you may be right, OpenSea (the NFT Marketplace used in the article) does lazy minting. Of course, one can still not make any money if no one buys the NFT.

The author writes about it here:

> There's a bit of nuance to how OpenSea does things. They do so-called lazy minting. While you may need to pay an initial gas fee to list a new collection, each NFT listing does not require any fees. This works because the NFT is not actually minted yet. It gets officially minted once the buyer pays the gas fees to mint the artwork on the blockchain.

Post reply on HN