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

NFT misconception: JPEG aren't stored on the Blockchain

erickhun.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 264 posts

Re: NFT misconception: JPEG aren't stored on the Blockchain

#81

Post by captn3m0 »

cloogshicer wrote: post #58
omgbear wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does it solve the problem? You still have to trust the physical object I hand over is the real signed copy.

Sorry, I meant it solves the problem in digital space. But even in offline space, the artist or seller could transfer an NFT to your account. You could then verify its authenticity (or even before the transfer).

In the digital space, we have signed PDFs. So a comic book artist could easily generate 100 numbered PDFs, and sign them each.

Anyone could verify it's authenticity using even Adobe Acrobat Reader, which has had this functionality for decades.

Re: NFT misconception: JPEG aren't stored on the Blockchain

#82

Post by meheleventyone »

mrtksn wrote: post #77
MaxBarraclough wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's simply a note useful to figure out who owns what within the framework of the community Owning an NFT does not mean you own the underlying asset.

Define owning. Depending on your definition, it may mean or may not mean owning. In the NFT circles, the record on the chain indicating that you own something means you own something because ownership transfer will happen within the exact same framework. NFT is not a media to purchase rights of an artwork to print it t-shirts or something like that. These things happen within the legal framework of a jurisdiction tha…

If you have to have some odd local definition of ownership you’ve already lost and know it!

Compare it to physical art. If you buy physical art you take control of the object and can do what you like with it including keeping it locked up in a customs warehouse.

If you buy a token you own the token not anything it points to. You can do what you like with the token but not what it points to. You own a link.

Re: NFT misconception: JPEG aren't stored on the Blockchain

#83

Post by atoav »

iamwil wrote: post #63
todd3834 wrote: post #17

I hate to admit it but I’m still struggling to understand why people would pay so much for NFTs. I feel like I fully understand what they are and why most people want me to believe it has value but I still don’t agree. I’m waiting for my mind to change but it hasn’t happened yet. It’s frustrating because so many people I respect are leaving their high paying jobs to work in web3 startups around NFTs and I feel dumb f…

It's best to think of NFTs as deeds to the art (or certificate of authenticity), rather than the art itself. I wrote this a little while back, and it might help you. https://interjectedfuture.com/nfts-unbundle-ownership-from-e... If NFTs as deed to art isn't convincing for you, check out ENS. https://ens.domains/ It's a name registrar that's a smart contract. Each ENS domain name is an NFT.

On a practical level it is the attempt to bait rich people into believing into ownership and scarcity in a place where it doesn't exist: The internet.

Re: NFT misconception: JPEG aren't stored on the Blockchain

#84

Post by robertlagrant »

cloogshicer wrote: post #58
omgbear wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does it solve the problem? You still have to trust the physical object I hand over is the real signed copy.

Sorry, I meant it solves the problem in digital space. But even in offline space, the artist or seller could transfer an NFT to your account. You could then verify its authenticity (or even before the transfer).

It doesn't solve it. What if what's at the other end of the URL the NFT points to changes or vanishes?

Re: NFT misconception: JPEG aren't stored on the Blockchain

#86

Post by Bombthecat »

sbierwagen wrote: post #32
todd3834 wrote: post #17

I hate to admit it but I’m still struggling to understand why people would pay so much for NFTs. I feel like I fully understand what they are and why most people want me to believe it has value but I still don’t agree. I’m waiting for my mind to change but it hasn’t happened yet. It’s frustrating because so many people I respect are leaving their high paying jobs to work in web3 startups around NFTs and I feel dumb f…

The most plausible conspiracy theories I've heard is that the big sales ($1 million plus) are wash trades, ("sell" an object to a confederate for 500 ETH, then they transfer the money right back via another route) and some classic money laundering Now of course there's a mountain of clueless suckers kicking off a regular tulip mania-style bubble. I wonder how many more weeks it will last.

Or: kids who started early with crypto with no idea of wealth and worth of a coin. When you habe thousands of coins. Giving out one isnt that expensive..

Re: NFT misconception: JPEG aren't stored on the Blockchain

#87

Post by sanmon3186 »

iamwil wrote: post #63
todd3834 wrote: post #17

I hate to admit it but I’m still struggling to understand why people would pay so much for NFTs. I feel like I fully understand what they are and why most people want me to believe it has value but I still don’t agree. I’m waiting for my mind to change but it hasn’t happened yet. It’s frustrating because so many people I respect are leaving their high paying jobs to work in web3 startups around NFTs and I feel dumb f…

It's best to think of NFTs as deeds to the art (or certificate of authenticity), rather than the art itself. I wrote this a little while back, and it might help you. https://interjectedfuture.com/nfts-unbundle-ownership-from-e... If NFTs as deed to art isn't convincing for you, check out ENS. https://ens.domains/ It's a name registrar that's a smart contract. Each ENS domain name is an NFT.

May be a dumb question but how can we certify that the same asset doesn’t exist as two or more NFTs on different block chains. There are tons of them and each can have its own monalisa.

Re: NFT misconception: JPEG aren't stored on the Blockchain

#89

Post by mrtksn »

meheleventyone wrote: post #82
mrtksn wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Define owning. Depending on your definition, it may mean or may not mean owning. In the NFT circles, the record on the chain indicating that you own something means you own something because ownership transfer will happen within the exact same framework. NFT is not a media to purchase rights of an artwork to print it t-shirts or something like that. These things happen within the legal framework of a jurisdiction tha…

If you have to have some odd local definition of ownership you’ve already lost and know it! Compare it to physical art. If you buy physical art you take control of the object and can do what you like with it including keeping it locked up in a customs warehouse. If you buy a token you own the token not anything it points to. You can do what you like with the token but not what it points to. You own a link.

The stuff you describe about physical art is only valid within a jurisdiction that has legislated ownership of physical items. You can very well take control of an object without owning it and lock it up in a custom warehouse. You can be custodian of it if the legal framework allows for that, it still can be yours of someone takes ot from you physically. Depending on the jurisdiction, it is possible that despite you paid to own the physical art piece, you are still not allowed to take photos of it in purpose to reproduce the images of it. You may own it but maybe you can't break it down or take it away from its place. These are all constructs that societies had it differently and it's all matter of legal and political processes.

There's no inartistic ownership, it is a social construct that happens within a community.

The blockchain doesn't operate within the traditional legislations, ownership within a blockchain means people who use it accept the record as true. If it says that you own it, you own it(within the community of people who use blockchain).

Re: NFT misconception: JPEG aren't stored on the Blockchain

#90

Post by razemio »

atoav wrote: post #83
iamwil wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's best to think of NFTs as deeds to the art (or certificate of authenticity), rather than the art itself. I wrote this a little while back, and it might help you. https://interjectedfuture.com/nfts-unbundle-ownership-from-e... If NFTs as deed to art isn't convincing for you, check out ENS. https://ens.domains/ It's a name registrar that's a smart contract. Each ENS domain name is an NFT.

On a practical level it is the attempt to bait rich people into believing into ownership and scarcity in a place where it doesn't exist: The internet.

Ownership of digital goods does exist since blockchain technology. You can now proof that things existed at a given time and that you are the rightful owner. That was not possible before without a middleman. Incoperate that to YouTube. At the moment millions of channels steal video revenue from their creators. If it would be accepted as proof that you where the first uploading this video, ownership can be proofen in an instant without lawyers.
Post reply on HN