11–20 of 539 posts
Counter point - art itself has absolutely zero non-monetary applications. If you disagree, then you must admit NFTs can be appreciated as art. If so, the argument of the OP is refuted. If you think art can be appreciated without being an NFT, then why pay any amount of money for any physical art when a super high resolution PNG does the same thing?
The NFT itself isn't - it's in fact just a .. wait for it now .....financial tool to monetize said art.
got 'em
Counter point - art itself has absolutely zero non-monetary applications. If you disagree, then you must admit NFTs can be appreciated as art. If so, the argument of the OP is refuted. If you think art can be appreciated without being an NFT, then why pay any amount of money for any physical art when a super high resolution PNG does the same thing?
Counter point - art itself has absolutely zero non-monetary applications. If you disagree, then you must admit NFTs can be appreciated as art. If so, the argument of the OP is refuted. If you think art can be appreciated without being an NFT, then why pay any amount of money for any physical art when a super high resolution PNG does the same thing?
That said, people are willing to pay irrationally large amounts of money for art for pretty similar reasons to why they pay money for NFTs.
- a technology that solves coordination among untrusted parties can be useful
- the early usecases for blockchains are mostly profiteering and rent-seeking
Claim 2: Google 'Bitcoin Spacechains'
Claim 3: On a long enough time scale all discoveries are minor, this is what it means to always be optimistically solving problems at the beginning of infinity.
Bitcoin is a tool for freedom.
I have a hard time imagining how your normal everyday people would put any faith whatsoever in crypto. It's another step removed from "just a bunch of numbers in an account" (current banking) that is even harder to explain and justify. Why should they trust it? So how can it succeed if everyday people don't want to use it?
Modern monetary policies whatever they are exist for reason, things would likely be worse without them. And the big cryptos have no monetary tools...
If someone steals my credit card, I have my credit card company to give me some level of protection. They can block transactions if they think it's stolen, and if I report it as stolen I can claw back money from fraudulent purchases.
If I purchase something and don't get what I paid for, I can contest it with customer service or my credit card company.
With crypto, a software flaw used to steal crypto can kill an entire company. They're largely powerless to stop it once the transaction has gone through.
With crypto, a xss attack or a misplaced password can cost me all of my coins.
With crypto, I have to triple check the address I'm sending coins to because I can't undo it.
With crypto, I have to spend what's sometimes a significant amount of money just to complete a transaction, and transactions can take minutes or hours to complete.
I think there's a future in crypto but we're in the dotcom boom days of it where most of the value is in speculation (and I suppose illegal purchases on the darknet). I'll wait for crypto 2.0.
No. Gold standard has none of the properties you told. Fiat currency is a disaster and evil. Besides, it's also likely the only reason why cryptocurrency is drawing attention to anyone.