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

€2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 398 posts

Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP

#181

Post by maxwell86 »

gilleain wrote: post #57
stnikolauswagne wrote: post #22

I made the mistake of diving a bit deeper into the group who bought it and found a proposal where they are talking about literally burning the book they just bought after digitizing it for … reasons I guess [0] At this point I just hope its some sort of practical joke or whatever because this just seems a bit much. [0] https://forum.spicedao.xyz/t/nft-of-the-book-w-proof-of-jpeg...

That's pretty insane. Oddly enough - the process in a library for digitising a copy of a book can be fairly destructive, as far as I understood from those doing it (at CUDL). The spine is chopped off, to make it easier to put it into a machine for scanning all the pages. The digital images can (should?) then be stored in a format that allows zooming, for example : https://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/view/MS-ADD-03967/1

If you then destroy the physical copy, how can you validate if the digitalisation succeeded?

For example, many Xerox scanners "switch" numbers when scanning:

https://www.dkriesel.com/en/blog/2013/0802_xerox-workcentres...

Those who used them to digitize, e.g, accounting documents, and then destroyed the originals, are proper screwed.

Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP

#182

Post by wonderwonder »

camjw wrote: post #30

My favorite part of this story is that they DAO has actually raised ~$8m, spent $3m on the book (10x the expected auction price), then the "core team" has started paying themselves ~$30k a month[0]. Also, how is this "decentralised" when one person owns over 50% of the voting token? [0] https://snapshot.org/#/dunedao.eth/proposal/0x2038fc240d0e85...

why did they spend so much for it, I cant seem to find that out. Was that their opening bid?

Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP

#183

Post by gilbetron »

jl6 wrote: post #158

For most of human history, people have lived in small, local information bubbles which were hard to penetrate with facts from the outside world. We see this manifest as the pre-industrial global patchwork of weird and wonderful religious/spiritual/cultural variety. Then somehow the world started to join up and information began to seep into local cultures and sweep away a lot of these pre-rational beliefs. And for a…

I've noticed the same phenomenon. I think it is, at least partly, driven by the collapse of local power structures that the local information bubbles (great phrase, btw!) enabled. Those power structures are built into our genes, and have roots that go back ages. They are fighting back, or at least our innate responses are fighting back. It's tough to run a church or a school or a family, when those under you can reveal your ignorance quickly on their phone. And so the power structures are attempting to exert their own reality. It's what Trump runs on, he pushes a reality that people want to exist, and are willing to let go of actual reality to get it. Not that the phenomenon isn't also seen in the Left, it just is less malignant (for now).

Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP

#184

Post by codetrotter »

sneak wrote: post #163
pjc50 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't really put content on the blockchain, that costs a surprising amount because of all the proof-of-waste. What happens is people put the content on a host and the URL on the blockchain. I suppose in theory it could be kept in IPFS, but few NFTs seem to bother with that.

IPFS isn't hosting, it's transport. You can't "put something on ipfs" and expect it to stay there any more than when you "put something on http".

https://ipfs.io/ says:

> Here's what happens when you add a file to IPFS — whether you're storing that file on your own local node or one operated by a pinning service or IPFS-enabled app.

Notice that wording: “Add a file to IPFS”.

It’s likewise fine to say, then, that you “put something on ipfs”.

Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP

#185

Post by ohgodplsno »

schleck8 wrote: post #117
ricardobeat wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's unbelievably funny and scary at the same time. This is the profile of their "Marketing Lead": https://twitter.com/YOJIMBO_KING/media Qualifications listed for their team include "Bitcoin Class of 2013", not sure if a joke or not? The impression is that this is a bunch of 13 year olds who suddenly got a windfall...

How can they take themselves seriously?

No idea why the other comment is dead. It's obvious the entire thing is a way for them to con some suckers into giving them what is basically a golden ticket to a life without any worries. They don't take themselves seriously. They're laughing all the way to the bank.

Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP

#188

Post by haasted »

tomerv wrote: post #172
haasted wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, they won't. All NFTs are hosted on hilariously centralized services like googleusercontent.com and similar. Browse through https://opensea.io/ , the most prominent NFT marketplace at the moment. Digging through the DOM of their website will reveal a lot of links to quite standard content storage solutions. They usually go through a bit of trouble to prevent people from simply clicking "view image in new tab" to…

Did you actually read the post? They propose to put it on-chain, and even say > [O]ur NFT collection could very possibly become the largest on-chain collection ever in the history of Ethereum. Time would only be on our side because as gas becomes more expensive, the window of opportunity to bypass our on-chain NFT collection would fade away.

Remember that this is from the people that believe buying a book gives them the IP rights to the work (should have bought a Harry Potter book). They may not have thought it all the way through.

To give an idea of the storage costs associated, I dug up this old stackexchange-answer about storage costs on Ethereum [0], which estimates that it costs about 76.000 USD / GB stored. Note that this is 5 year old answer, so the price will probably have multiplied like the price of ETH since then.

Edit: Here's [1] a newer, updated price estimate that takes current prices into account : 309.9 Million / GB. LoL!

[0] https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/questions/872/what-is-the...

[1] https://proderivatives.com/blog/2019/5/10/minimizing-data-st...

Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP

#189

Post by donkeyd »

sneak wrote: post #163
pjc50 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't really put content on the blockchain, that costs a surprising amount because of all the proof-of-waste. What happens is people put the content on a host and the URL on the blockchain. I suppose in theory it could be kept in IPFS, but few NFTs seem to bother with that.

IPFS isn't hosting, it's transport. You can't "put something on ipfs" and expect it to stay there any more than when you "put something on http".

That's odd, since the TP in HTTP stands for transfer protocol, but the FS in IPFS stands for file system. You'd expect to be able to store data on a file system. That's what I use my file system for anyway.

Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP

#190

Post by osobo »

jl6 wrote: post #158

For most of human history, people have lived in small, local information bubbles which were hard to penetrate with facts from the outside world. We see this manifest as the pre-industrial global patchwork of weird and wonderful religious/spiritual/cultural variety. Then somehow the world started to join up and information began to seep into local cultures and sweep away a lot of these pre-rational beliefs. And for a…

In the last ten years there has been a significant change in mainstream content from information (what) to personalities (who). A major driver has been the adoption of social media by the mainstream: Uncle Bob pawing his cell phone while on the toilet. Both closed circle SM (checking on your friends and acquaintances) and public facing SM (checking the influencers) have created a whole new, uncontrolled feeding ground to some old vices: Jaleousy and greed. Watching other people's lives and see them spending money and enjoying fineries in an (supposedly) unedited, reality-like format makes a lot of people feel that it must all be real and they should be living that live themselves. Whether it's about wealth, ideologies or any other aspect of lifestyle: Suddenly it's right there, dangled in front of them. This, coupled with the ease of packing in actionable links and buttons, creates a whole new dynamic where people get lured in by shiny things (crypto/NFS/MLM etc) only to get duped. It's a really old phenomenon, though.
Post reply on HN