201–210 of 411 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Permission to an API service maybe, the rest of the examples create more problems than they solve.
How come? Just think about all cases of fake liceses? This could be verified rather easily with an NFT while faking it would be quite hard.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing about NFTs is that many people who buy them "don't get NFTs". All an NFT is is a token that represents ownership, like if the title to your car or house deed was on a blockchain. NFTs have some sane use causes like designating the owner of a valuable asset or creating electronic tickets that can be resold or transferred without some centralized entity like ticketmaster. Prior to NFTs existing, would you pur…
> All an NFT is is a token that represents ownership, like if the title to your car or house deed was on a blockchain. No. An NFT is just a few bytes of text pinned to a blockchain. They are essentially useless, and every useful property of an NFT can be achieved using asymmetric encryption or digital signatures, the blockchain component is just wasteful hype.
The ability to hold and trade the NFT on the public blockchain makes that asset accessible to a large number of autonomous on-chain markets, like dApps which allow a person to take out self-executing loans that use the NFT as collateral.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Beanie Babies also looked stupid. It's just another fad and bubble. https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2015/03/02/beanie-baby-bubbl...
At least you may physically own a beanie doll.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> An NFT is decent evidence in favour of you being the creator of a work, if there's no earlier evidence of somebody else being the creator of the work It's really not at all reliable. I could create an NFT for the "Joeboy" HN account right now, and ostensibly become the owner of your HN account since such an NFT does not already exist. Obviously, this makes no sense, the NFT is meaningless.
No, you could create an NFT that supposedly represents that but unless people buy into the idea, no is becoming the owner of anything. If instead Ycombinator would release each user as an NFT, and allow people to buy/sell then, then yes you could become the owner of an HN account via NFTs. But until then, the one who knows the password is the owner. People seems to have some sort of problem with trying to understand…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The (non-) fugibility of a token is just one aspect of it. You can code a non-tradable NFT no problem. Tradable NFTs are just the hype right now.
> You can code a non-tradable NFT no problem. WTF does that even mean? Do people remember what a blockchain even is, at this point? A blockchain is a chain of transactions. You take away the transactions, and its not a blockchain anymore. Unless we really stretch the definition of a "transaction" or blockchain...... Cryptocurrency has lost the plot. People are talking about blockchains, that don't have mining, or tra…
The blockchain space is just starting out and people try new things. But many can only see the crypto currency use-case.
Cryptocurrency was a broken concept from the very start. It assumed that you can build a financial system by engineering "trust" in purely technical terms. Trust is something between humans. If you cannot find an arrangement of checks and balances that gives people comfort that the "system" is not ripping them off there is no amount of cryptoaccounting that will solve it for you. The very anonymity of the bitcoin fou…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I must be getting old because I just don't get NFT's. They look stupid and I don't get why anyone would buy them. Declining tech companies and startups seem to be trying to crowbar them into their products much like Blockchain when it was new and shiny. Perhaps younger me would of seen something I can't anymore.
The emperor is dressed in NFTs.
The whole NFT craze lost me when tech founders I once highly respected started pushing and showing off their ugly gifs and trading cards on Twitter. Bad taste of the bored rich is not a new thing, but I hope NFTs won't become a noble tradition.
It's not just ugly gifs. It's digital art, your online game items, concert tickets, supermarket vouchers and so on. Quote from statista: "In 2020, global gaming audiences spent an approximate 54 billion U.S. dollars on additional in-game content". But the players don't own their purchases. You don't play the game anymore, servers go down or you get banned and all your stuff is gone. Think about that. Edit: Of course…
Everyone imagines "just imagine if I invested when BTC was And with everyone from celebrities to investors constantly promoting it, it is hard not to jump on the craze.
All "doom and gloom" has bounced off the market. I am still expecting a massive crash, but to be honest, if I invested a few years ago I would be sitting at 3-20x my investment.
It is insanely profitable.
Thats the fun part of all this :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's an NFT which is the best description I've ever seen of what NFTs actually are, https://foundation.app/@visualizevalue/nfts-explained-12012 It sold for 74 ETH.
Except that, it's not even true. NFTs are equivalent to a orange checkmark on the website twotter.com that I just set up.
For example, we know the original creator of Nyan Cat came out of the woodwork to retroactively mint an NFT for it, https://foundation.app/@NyanCat/nyan-cat-219, which sold for 300 ETH. Obviously, anyone can create an NFT with the same gif, but we are reasonably certain that the actual created this ONE and declared it be the original.
Obviously, this is a very odd thing to try to wrap your head around, but is it really that different from valuing original physical artwork?