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

Jack Dorsey’s $2.9M NFT dropped 99% in value

artnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 262 posts

Re: Jack Dorsey’s $2.9M NFT dropped 99% in value

#121

Post by gonehome »

dmitriid wrote: post #103
gonehome wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s an active market, but it’s mostly winner takes all and ones that establish a brand/community (helped by the tokens gating access to merchandise or events). Also good when token includes IP. BAYC/MAYC is the biggest, milady seems to be getting traction (not sure why). These specific ones are also easy to liquidate for now because of opensea bots willing to sell ~10% below “floor” so they can flip later. I made…

> The interesting bit is gated community access/easily verifiable ownership of membership. The art is a meme-ish way to signal this status, but the ability to verify easily is the new capability There's literally nothing new or interesting about memberships .

The new bit is trivial public lookup and membership transfer without relying on a central data store or authority.

That is a new capability and allows for new things.

Re: Jack Dorsey’s $2.9M NFT dropped 99% in value

#122

Post by ffggvv »

disruptalot wrote: post #92

The conceptions of what happened is so completely removed from reality and it's disheartening to see commenters blinded by the hate for crypto stuff to the extent that they don't even bother to concern the details Let's look at some facts. The _first_ * Offer* made on this NFT was $280 The current top bid for this $29,000 It is not sold, so to say that its value has actually dropped is just silly. If you imagine this…

okay so whats the cutoff that we can establish a price? a month with no high offer?

at the very least it shows how illiquid the market is

Re: Jack Dorsey’s $2.9M NFT dropped 99% in value

#124

Post by Nextgrid »

partiallypro wrote: post #79

NFTs tied to physical goods (to help solve counterfeiting or sorting membership) makes sense. NFTs that are purely digital in nature and offer nothing else, seems very silly to me because a digital space has no scarcity. An infinite amount of digital goods can be produced.

Tying a blockchain record to a physical object is impossible. This stupidity has been tried many times by various conmen with no success. Here's just one of many failures: https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2018/06/how-i-became-leonardo-da-vi...

The reason blockchain works for cryptocurrencies and NFTs (that is the token itself, not the art that the token claims to represent) is because the entire source of truth is on the blockchain.

When it comes to physical objects, the source of truth is now split between the physical world and the blockchain. If your token must represent a physical object then you need some way for the real-world state and the blockchain state to always be kept in sync. That is impossible. The best approximation is to rely on a trusted authority for this, but then you don't need a blockchain anymore and can just have that trusted party maintain its own database.

Re: Jack Dorsey’s $2.9M NFT dropped 99% in value

#125

Post by tablespoon »

colpabar wrote: post #65
tablespoon wrote: post #24

From another article on the same topic https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/apr/14/twitter-n... : > Man who paid $2.9m for NFT of Jack Dorsey’s first tweet set to lose almost $2.9m > ‘This is the Mona Lisa of the digital world’, says crypto entrepreneur Sina Estavi who bought the NFT in March 2021 This is a good example of why so many people don't take cryptocurrency seriously. It full of hype men who spout tr…

This is a genuine question - should anyone take cryptocurrency seriously? To me, the only purpose of it is to make money. It's the stock market, but with less rules, and it's 24/7. People will say that crypto is important because it's decentralized and non-fiat or whatever, with the implication being that it's not controlled by a government. But we have seen time and time again that that isn't true, and if a governme…

> This is a genuine question - should anyone take cryptocurrency seriously? To me, the only purpose of it is to make money. It's the stock market, but with less rules, and it's 24/7.

I would say no. It's a technology that serves no practical purpose, since the problems it addresses are ones purely created by certain peculiar ideologies. If you're not indulging in one of those ideologies, there's no point. And, like you mentioned, it doesn't even succeed at addressing those problems. A virtual technology can't free you from real-world power, because it's dependent on the real world and can be attacked there, where it's weak.

From outside those peculiar ideologies, something like Bitcoin is like an application written so badly that it's like 486 PC that requires as much energy as Argentina to run. Why should anyone want something like that?

Re: Jack Dorsey’s $2.9M NFT dropped 99% in value

#127

Post by jhap »

eric_cc wrote: post #114
colpabar wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a genuine question - should anyone take cryptocurrency seriously? To me, the only purpose of it is to make money. It's the stock market, but with less rules, and it's 24/7. People will say that crypto is important because it's decentralized and non-fiat or whatever, with the implication being that it's not controlled by a government. But we have seen time and time again that that isn't true, and if a governme…

> if a government wants to freeze your crypto assets, they can do so easily. Lol source?

I'm not the OP, but this from the Matt Levine newsletter last week, which I think is what he is getting at:

> 1. If you hold your coins at a regulated exchange, sure yeah the authorities can probably get a warrant and seize your Bitcoins.

> 2. If you hold your coins in your own wallet but you write down your private key in, like, your phone’s notes app, and it backs up to the cloud, then the authorities can probably get your cloud provider to give them access to your notes and read the key and use that to seize all your Bitcoins. (This happened to the alleged Bitfinex hack launderers.)

> 3. If you write your private key on a scrap of paper, the authorities can search your house until they find it and seize all your Bitcoins.

> 4. If you memorize your private key, or just write it down somewhere really safe, then they can arrest you and throw you in jail until you tell them what it is, and then seize all your Bitcoins.

Re: Jack Dorsey’s $2.9M NFT dropped 99% in value

#128

Post by caymanjim »

thrdbndndn wrote: post #87
lmkg wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's actually an NFT of a screenshot of the first tweet. Note that for space reasons, NFTs do not generally "contain" their payload. The actual contents of the blockchain is just a URL of the screenshot. The URL points to a centralized server, and the screenshot is publicly accessible. But yes, the Tweet itself remains under Twitter's purview, i.e. centralized. An NFT can only contain authority or ownership recognize…

SO it's totally possible for the server hosting the image URL to be gone after many years?

The server will be gone some day, but it doesn't matter, because the image hosted there is easily copied and freely available many other places. Nothing was ever gained in the first place by having it hosted on the server mentioned by the NFT, and nothing is lost if it's not there anymore. The NFT never contained any value or rights.

Re: Jack Dorsey’s $2.9M NFT dropped 99% in value

#129

Post by Finnucane »

disruptalot wrote: post #92

The conceptions of what happened is so completely removed from reality and it's disheartening to see commenters blinded by the hate for crypto stuff to the extent that they don't even bother to concern the details Let's look at some facts. The _first_ * Offer* made on this NFT was $280 The current top bid for this $29,000 It is not sold, so to say that its value has actually dropped is just silly. If you imagine this…

If Sotheby’s put a Picasso on the market and the bids were less than 1 percent of the asking price, many would say, wtf is going on.

Re: Jack Dorsey’s $2.9M NFT dropped 99% in value

#130

Post by eric_cc »

adventured wrote: post #101
colpabar wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a genuine question - should anyone take cryptocurrency seriously? To me, the only purpose of it is to make money. It's the stock market, but with less rules, and it's 24/7. People will say that crypto is important because it's decentralized and non-fiat or whatever, with the implication being that it's not controlled by a government. But we have seen time and time again that that isn't true, and if a governme…

> should anyone take cryptocurrency seriously? To me, the only purpose of it is to make money. It's the stock market, but with less rules, and it's 24/7. It's not the stock market at all. Not even close. The stock market is a system that enables the buying and selling of shares in productive business - businesses that provide goods and services, that generate revenue and (ideally) profit. As a shareholder you own a f…

Bitcoin is attempting to BE value better than fiat.

There is a possibility that we eventually achieve a bitcoin circular economy. In such a scenario, Bitcoin does not go up or down against fiat because there will be no demand for fiat.

Post reply on HN