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

TheNFTBay: Fake, but Worth Discussing

clubnft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 195 posts

Re: TheNFTBay: Fake, but Worth Discussing

#91

Post by zepto »

originalcvk wrote: post #81
zepto wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that you also told this lie: > Just like a deed conveys ownership of a house at some address, the token conveys ownership of that media.

Happy to update it. Better? Again, if you don't like specific wording, I invite you to write a better explanation for regular folks which is simultaneously perfectly accurate in every sense in every phrase and word you use.

> Better?

Not really. The original document contained an outright lie which have now removed because it was exposed.

If you didn’t accept it was a lie, you wouldn’t have removed it.

This has nothing to do with imperfect accuracy. It has to do with you writing an outright falsehood.

Re: TheNFTBay: Fake, but Worth Discussing

#92

Post by shiohime »

NicoJuicy wrote: post #75
shiohime wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a fair question, and really I think it comes down to degrees of trust. As you say, ultimately I as the creator of the tokens could possibly utilize my update authority to change some of the underlying metadata for the token. The only real reason I can think of that I'd do it for this project is bugfixes if there is something botched in the metadata for specific tokens. I don't quite know the extent of power th…

But trust is currently easy online. I can initiate a chargeback through traditional currencies. Bought source is available for download as soon as I buy something. So i have it in my possession on my drive when eg. Envato deletes the assets because of copyright infringement. Also, i frequently visit https://rekt.news/ and trust seems to be far-fetched. Even the auditors sometimes keep the 0-days to themselves.

Yeah, it's true that chargeback is not possible in the same way in cryptocurrencies, so there is just an inherent risk vector there.

I think it would be possible, and likely, that there could be a marketplace / service specifically for high-end art, that could have built in functionality that explicitly makes their pieces immutable.

But really I do think it kind of comes with the territory in some ways, when it comes to refunds. I think for instance I could create a service that allows for refunds on the initial sale from me as a provider, however if you buy something from the secondhand market, you wouldn't be able to receive a refund from me as a producer, you'd have to work with the secondhand market / user you bought it from personally.

It's possible to create trustworthy products and platforms I think. But yeah, right now there exists no easy mechanism to get a chargeback, nor do I think there likely will ever be such a thing on most chains, as chargebacks rely on centralization (banks) to transfer funds to your account.

Also thanks for sharing that link, I've never heard of the site and it's pretty interesting.

Re: TheNFTBay: Fake, but Worth Discussing

#93

Post by chrisco255 »

malermeister wrote: post #77
chrisco255 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it does. Go try and right click save a Bitcoin and sell it on Coinbase or Gemini.

Not sure how that's related to art though. Of course a self-referential system is good for internal consistency. The issue comes with trying to use it for anything outside the system, such as monkey jpegs.

Not at all. It clearly works just fine as the marketplace volume suggests. Go right click save a CryptoPunk and try and sell it. Go make a BAYC clone and try and sell it. Try it out on chain, deploy your own copy of the smart contract. Or go and create a website and set up a Paypal account and try to sell some JPEGs. Let me know how that works out. Even if you succeed in making money, like selling a fake Gucci purse, you'd only succeed in increasing the clout of the original.

Re: TheNFTBay: Fake, but Worth Discussing

#94

Post by shiohime »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #78
shiohime wrote: post #28

I someday hope that people realize what you can do with single issue tokens beyond simply having a link to cloud storage. You can create products that utilize this same behavior, but also leverage proof of ownership to create actual unique applications. With even just an ounce of developer ingenuity, you can use NFTs as an access token to whatever service you wish to provide. I put together a collection that is both…

> The right-click download picture is completely meaningless as the true power is simply proof of ownership of the piece, having a copy of the image means nothing if you don't own the token and you will be denied access to the service. Sure, fine. Why do I care? I can use said copy on any other service I want. If your argument is "ah yes, but someone out there believes that's not as valuable because it ignores their…

I don't think you are understanding at all what I am saying lol.

I have a program, think of it as a traditional web app, that has a backend that validates whether you own the asset prior to granting access.

You can't use any copy of the png to interact with other services, since there is only *one* service that allows for the interactive capabilities, and it requires ownership of the token to access. Hell, you could even take it a step further, take the png and make a forge of a token from my collection. You still won't be able to access the service with a forged token with the exact same metadata and image, because it will easily be able to detect it is not part of my collection.

All you would have is a PNG. Not access to the actual services that are only possible via ownership. I could extend my project and create a plethora of services that are only accessible to people who own one of the NFTs from my collection, and that is what I intend to do.

Re: TheNFTBay: Fake, but Worth Discussing

#95

Post by zepto »

gfodor wrote: post #87
malermeister wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing about cultural norms is that they're only meaningful if they're accepted by the prevailing culture. Based on this thread, I would say NFTs are not. So what exactly is the point of an "alternative form of ownership" that is only considered valid by a small subculture and not society at large? Is it really ownership in any meaningful sense?

NFTs are considered ownership in nascent online societies. There is no “at large” society. Even nation state recognized ownership in terms of copyright has its limits.

If there is no “at large society”, why don’t you live in a nicer house?

Re: TheNFTBay: Fake, but Worth Discussing

#96

Post by zepto »

gfodor wrote: post #90
nefitty wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tried to understand what you said but it ends up indecipherable like a koan. In this case, this koan confers a monetary benefit to the self-appointed Zen Masters of crypto. For only a few dollars the followers get a little sticker that says "Enlightened".

Concretely there are a variety of metaverse projects which only allow you to spawn the item if you own the (creator sanctioned) NFT.

It’s perfectly fair to say that NFTs work as an in-game currency and nothing more.

Re: TheNFTBay: Fake, but Worth Discussing

#97

Post by zepto »

gfodor wrote: post #85
evan_ wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you like to participate in an alternative cultural norm of ownership of a bridge in Brooklyn?

Depends on the context. For example if it meant I was the only one able to spawn the bridge in Meta’s Horizon, maybe? You just don’t know what’s happening.

> You just don’t know what’s happening.

You mean NFTs as an in-game currency for Facebook’s VR?

Yes, that’s a reasonable account of what they are good for.

Re: TheNFTBay: Fake, but Worth Discussing

#98

Post by [deleted] »

GDC7 wrote: post #42
gruez wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't fully agree with your characterization. I'm more in favor of: Stealing the painting = hacking the wallet/private key to transfer the NFT Taking a picture of the painting = right clicking

> Taking a picture of the painting = right clicking Absolutely not. A pic won't ever provide you the same satisfaction as standing in front of a painting, that's an innate characteristic of paintings. Right clicking a JPG , saving it on your laptop and looking at whenever you want gives you the exact same satisfaction as paying 100k USD for the work of art. Matter of fact it gives you way more satisfaction, because y…

[deleted]

Re: TheNFTBay: Fake, but Worth Discussing

#99

Post by verdverm »

gfodor wrote: post #85
evan_ wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you like to participate in an alternative cultural norm of ownership of a bridge in Brooklyn?

Depends on the context. For example if it meant I was the only one able to spawn the bridge in Meta’s Horizon, maybe? You just don’t know what’s happening.

What would stop someone from spawning a slightly modified (imperceptible to human eye) Brooklyn Bridge?

The idea of artificial scarcity seems central to NFT, but it is unclear if this is really a moat or desirable. Does it really convey exclusivity over a "unique" set of bits?

Re: TheNFTBay: Fake, but Worth Discussing

#100

Post by evan_ »

gfodor wrote: post #85
evan_ wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you like to participate in an alternative cultural norm of ownership of a bridge in Brooklyn?

Depends on the context. For example if it meant I was the only one able to spawn the bridge in Meta’s Horizon, maybe? You just don’t know what’s happening.

For $6,500 USD I will create a GitHub repo called “A Bridge in Brooklyn” containing your name in the readme. You may consider the commit ID your non-fungible token. If you wish to sell it I will add another commit with the new owner’s name after I receive a $500 “gas fee”.

I will have my kid draw a picture of a bridge and send you a JPG of it; you can put that on Meta Horizon as many times as you want.

Naturally like all NFT wallets I fully reserve the right to delete the repo at any time for any reason with no warning.

Lmk what you think and I’ll get you my Venmo.

Post reply on HN